On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:43, Terry Reedy wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>>
>> This is somewhat covered by components, but it's implicit. Would it be
>> worth making this explicit? I have always wondered if people would be more
>> willing to help out if they could easily search for pure Python c
Brett Cannon wrote:
This is somewhat covered by components, but it's implicit. Would it be
worth making this explicit? I have always wondered if people would be
more willing to help out if they could easily search for pure Python
code issues if that is as far as they feel comfortable.
If an
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 20:55, Terry Reedy wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>
>> I have seen it said that one very useful activity is reviewing patches.
>>> Of the issues in the tracker, it is not immediately clear to me what is
>>> required of such a review. Many of these patches appear to be bund
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I have seen it said that one very useful activity is reviewing patches.
Of the issues in the tracker, it is not immediately clear to me what is
required of such a review. Many of these patches appear to be bundled in
with feature requests, leaving the question of whether th
> I have seen it said that one very useful activity is reviewing patches.
> Of the issues in the tracker, it is not immediately clear to me what is
> required of such a review. Many of these patches appear to be bundled in
> with feature requests, leaving the question of whether the review it
> jud
Hi all,
I have seen it said that one very useful activity is reviewing patches. Of
the issues in the tracker, it is not immediately clear to me what is
required of such a review. Many of these patches appear to be bundled in
with feature requests, leaving the question of whether the review it judg
