Am 14.05.14 16:28, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> On May 14, 2014, at 02:20 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>> Do we want an official policy written down in a PEP (yes, I can write it)?
>> Should I keep closing these patches and saying that we are not adding
>> support for new operating systems and be hand-wav
Am 15.05.14 16:20, schrieb Skip Montanaro:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> We already have such buildbots, they are in the "unstable" category.
>> You can browse through existing buildbots here:
>> https://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/
>
> I can't see how to distinguish
On Thu, 15 May 2014 19:14:55 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2014 09:40:33 -0500
> Skip Montanaro wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > > I view stable buildbots as staying up and testing critical platforms.
> >
> > Would "supported" and "unsupported"
On Thu, 15 May 2014 09:40:33 -0500
Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > I view stable buildbots as staying up and testing critical platforms.
>
> Would "supported" and "unsupported" (or "critical" and "optional"?)
> make more sense? "Unstable" suggests
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> I view stable buildbots as staying up and testing critical platforms.
Would "supported" and "unsupported" (or "critical" and "optional"?)
make more sense? "Unstable" suggests "broken" to me, not "we don't
really care about these."
S
On Thu May 15 2014 at 10:24:45 AM, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
> > We already have such buildbots, they are in the "unstable" category.
> > You can browse through existing buildbots here:
> > https://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/
>
> I can't se
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> We already have such buildbots, they are in the "unstable" category.
> You can browse through existing buildbots here:
> https://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/
I can't see how to distinguish "stable" from "unstable" (or to view
just the "unst
On Thu, 15 May 2014 08:20:03 -0500
Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Main problem with rare platform support is not breaking it accidentally,
> > since without buildbots we won't know when it's broken. This is why we don't
> > make any promises
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Main problem with rare platform support is not breaking it accidentally,
> since without buildbots we won't know when it's broken. This is why we don't
> make any promises.
Should we (or do we) offer to run (unofficial) buildbots for
mai
Main problem with rare platform support is not breaking it accidentally,
since without buildbots we won't know when it's broken. This is why we
don't make any promises.
On May 14, 2014 9:02 PM, "Cameron Simpson" wrote:
> On 14May2014 14:45, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>> On Wed May 14 2014 at 10:43:18
On 14May2014 14:45, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Wed May 14 2014 at 10:43:18 AM, Antoine Pitrou
wrote:
On Wed, 14 May 2014 14:20:26 +
Brett Cannon wrote:
> Over the past week or so there have been 2 patches to add support for
> various UNIX OSs. Now I thought we had stopped trying to add new es
On 15 May 2014 01:52, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> I consider CPU and compiler separate things. As long as we have a buildbot
> covering the CPU or compiler somehow I say they are covered (and someone is
> willing to help make sure they continue to work). I'm not going to say that
> we need a BSD ARM b
I wonder if one or more people who maintain unofficial forks on
minority platforms (OS/2, VMS, etc) could create an informational PEP
about the process (benefits and pitfalls) of that kind of effort?
Skip
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On Wed May 14 2014 at 11:33:27 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 14.05.2014 17:08, schrieb Brett Cannon:
> > On Wed May 14 2014 at 11:02:50 AM, R. David Murray <
> rdmur...@bitdance.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 14 May 2014 11:31:15 -0300, "Joao S. O. Bueno" <
> >> jsbu...@python.org.br> wrote:
>
Am 14.05.2014 17:08, schrieb Brett Cannon:
> On Wed May 14 2014 at 11:02:50 AM, R. David Murray
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 14 May 2014 11:31:15 -0300, "Joao S. O. Bueno" <
>> jsbu...@python.org.br> wrote:
>>> +1 for an official policy that comes with a "permanent maintainer for
>>> this platform requi
On Wed May 14 2014 at 11:02:50 AM, R. David Murray
wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2014 11:31:15 -0300, "Joao S. O. Bueno" <
> jsbu...@python.org.br> wrote:
> > +1 for an official policy that comes with a "permanent maintainer for
> > this platform required" as part of the list
> > of requisites.
> >
>
On Wed, 14 May 2014 11:31:15 -0300, "Joao S. O. Bueno"
wrote:
> +1 for an official policy that comes with a "permanent maintainer for
> this platform required" as part of the list
> of requisites.
>
> js
> -><-
>
> On 14 May 2014 11:20, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > Over the past week or so ther
On Wed May 14 2014 at 10:43:18 AM, Antoine Pitrou
wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2014 14:20:26 +
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > Over the past week or so there have been 2 patches to add support for
> > various UNIX OSs. Now I thought we had stopped trying to add new esoteric
> > OSs (e.g. I had never he
On Wed, 14 May 2014 14:20:26 +
Brett Cannon wrote:
> Over the past week or so there have been 2 patches to add support for
> various UNIX OSs. Now I thought we had stopped trying to add new esoteric
> OSs (e.g. I had never heard of MirOS until the patch for it came in), but I
> can't find a PE
+1 for an official policy that comes with a "permanent maintainer for
this platform required" as part of the list
of requisites.
js
-><-
On 14 May 2014 11:20, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Over the past week or so there have been 2 patches to add support for
> various UNIX OSs. Now I thought we had
On May 14, 2014, at 02:20 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>Do we want an official policy written down in a PEP (yes, I can write it)?
>Should I keep closing these patches and saying that we are not adding
>support for new operating systems and be hand-wavy about it?
Yes, I think a PEP describing both pol
Over the past week or so there have been 2 patches to add support for
various UNIX OSs. Now I thought we had stopped trying to add new esoteric
OSs (e.g. I had never heard of MirOS until the patch for it came in), but I
can't find a PEP that spells out what it takes to get a platform supported (
ht
22 matches
Mail list logo
