how about that py 2.5.2 release. anybody? =D
On Jan 3, 2008 2:05 PM, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 3.x fixes, because there's no schedule for 2.6.
> >
> > Eh? PEP 3000 has a schedule that includes 2.6:
>
> OK, no schedule that I knew about :-). I'll get back to work on it.
>
> Bil
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 2:36 PM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A patch should contain edits for Misc/NEWS. Patches without
>> documentation and NEWS updates costs the committer more time
>> and reduces the likelihood of a commit.
>>
>> Even a perfect patch costs se
Christian Heimes schrieb:
> Mike Klaas wrote:
>> Question: should patches include edits to whatsnew.rst, or is the
>> committer responsible for adding a note?
>
> A patch should contain edits for Misc/NEWS.
And documentation changes should include proper "versionchanged" or
"versionadded" tags
On Jan 5, 2008 2:36 PM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Klaas wrote:
> > Question: should patches include edits to whatsnew.rst, or is the
> > committer responsible for adding a note?
>
> A patch should contain edits for Misc/NEWS. Patches without
> documentation and NEWS updates
Mike Klaas wrote:
> Question: should patches include edits to whatsnew.rst, or is the
> committer responsible for adding a note?
A patch should contain edits for Misc/NEWS. Patches without
documentation and NEWS updates costs the committer more time and reduces
the likelihood of a commit.
Even
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 11:45:34PM -0800, Mike Klaas wrote:
> Question: should patches include edits to whatsnew.rst, or is the
> committer responsible for adding a note?
It's OK to submit or commit patches that don't update whatsnew.rst;
I'll notice the checkin and decide whether to include the
On 3-Jan-08, at 1:07 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2008 11:49 AM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Python 2.6 seems to be entirely targeted at people who really want to
>> be on Python 3, but have code that will need to be ported. I
>> certainly don't view it as interesting i
> Now thinking of how to produce this relationships, I think that I will
> change my approach to the issues. I'll start to be more aggressive
> when reviewing a patch or bug. Aggressive in the sense of
> asking/commenting/proposing even if I don't get the full grasp of the
> issue. This could lead
2008/1/3, Titus Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The question is, is reviewing patches a good place to contribute? Also,
> if I (and others) could have a "core mentor" with commit access, that
> might streamline things. As it is, I am worried that patch reviews will
For a core_mentor/padawan (wink)
On Jan 3, 2008 5:24 PM, Titus Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 03:24:16PM -0500, Joseph Armbruster wrote:
> -> Having a "core mentor" would be great but do they really have time for
> -> that? I've been lucky at finding people in #python / #python-dev) that can
> -> answe
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 03:24:16PM -0500, Joseph Armbruster wrote:
-> Having a "core mentor" would be great but do they really have time for
-> that? I've been lucky at finding people in #python / #python-dev) that can
-> answer development inquiries (or at least verify something is or is not a
->
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 09:55:44PM +0100, Christian Heimes wrote:
-> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
-> > You don't put the bar high for newbies on the Python project eh? :)
-> >
-> > I am assumign that most of those contributions code-wise need a fair
amount of
-> > knowledge of Python's in
-> > Incidentally, I'm planning to set up an SVK repos containing the GHOP
-> > doc patches; that way they can stay sync'ed with 2.6 work. I'd be happy
-> > to do the same thing with reviewed-and-probably-OK patches, although I
-> > don't know if repository proliferation is a generally good idea ;
> > 3.x fixes, because there's no schedule for 2.6.
>
> Eh? PEP 3000 has a schedule that includes 2.6:
OK, no schedule that I knew about :-). I'll get back to work on it.
Bill
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/ma
On Jan 3, 2008 12:17 PM, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2.6; Py3k is
> > mostly done by a handful of people, and almost nobody is working much
> > on 2.6.
>
> There's a great Duke Ellington quote: ``Without a deadline, baby, I
> woul
On Jan 3, 2008 12:17 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -On [20080103 20:39], Guido van Rossum ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2.6; Py3k is
> >mostly done by a handful of people, and almost nobody is working much
> >on 2
> The question is, is reviewing patches a good place to contribute? Also,
> if I (and others) could have a "core mentor" with commit access, that
> might streamline things. As it is, I am worried that patch reviews will
> pass through the ether without leaving a visible trace; that's OK and
> und
On Jan 3, 2008 11:49 AM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For those of us still using Python 2.4 and earlier, it's hard to be
> motivated to worry about Python 3.0, no matter how wonderful it
> looks. (It doesn't help that my own available time appears to
> decrease daily with the kids and
Joseph Armbruster wrote:
> With respects to the bug tracker, when I select Search and Python 2.6, I
> retrieved 208 open bugs. At a quick glance, I found two that were windows,
> but not tagged appropriately. If it's worthwhile, I can spend some time
> this evening browsing the list of current 2.
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 02:49:27PM -0500, Fred Drake wrote:
> Python 2.6 seems to be entirely targeted at people who really want to
> be on Python 3, but have code that will need to be ported. I
> certainly don't view it as interesting in its own right.
The bulk of the *language* changes in 2
On Jan 3, 2008 11:40 AM, Titus Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:15:04AM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> -> We're getting a fair number of doc contributions, especially since the
> -> docs were converted from Latex to ReST, and especially since the start
> -> of the GHO
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> You don't put the bar high for newbies on the Python project eh? :)
>
> I am assumign that most of those contributions code-wise need a fair amount of
> knowledge of Python's internals?
It's neither impossible nor too hard to get involved. I got from
"haven'
Titus,
Having a "core mentor" would be great but do they really have time for
that? I've been lucky at finding people in #python / #python-dev) that can
answer development inquiries (or at least verify something is or is not a
bug).
With respects to the bug tracker, when I select Search and Pyth
> My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2.6; Py3k is
> mostly done by a handful of people, and almost nobody is working much
> on 2.6.
There's a great Duke Ellington quote: ``Without a deadline, baby, I
wouldn't do nothing.''
The SSL code in 2.6 is out-of-date (buggy) compared to t
-On [20080103 20:39], Guido van Rossum ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2.6; Py3k is
>mostly done by a handful of people, and almost nobody is working much
>on 2.6.
You don't put the bar high for newbies on the Python project eh? :)
I am assumign th
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 02:49:27PM -0500, Fred Drake wrote:
-> On Jan 3, 2008, at 2:15 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
-> > My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2.6; Py3k is
-> > mostly done by a handful of people, and almost nobody is working much
-> > on 2.6.
->
-> For those of us st
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 05:48:25PM -0200, Facundo Batista wrote:
-> 2008/1/3, Titus Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
->
-> > What needs to be done with 2.6? I'm happy to review patches, although
-> > even were commit access on offer I'm too scatterbrained to do a good job
-> > of it.
->
-> We have 109
On Jan 3, 2008, at 2:15 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2.6; Py3k is
> mostly done by a handful of people, and almost nobody is working much
> on 2.6.
For those of us still using Python 2.4 and earlier, it's hard to be
motivated to worry about
2008/1/3, Titus Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> What needs to be done with 2.6? I'm happy to review patches, although
> even were commit access on offer I'm too scatterbrained to do a good job
> of it.
We have 109 patches open for 2.5 [1], and 118 patches open for 2.6 [2].
Note that the added numb
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:15:04AM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
-> We're getting a fair number of doc contributions, especially since the
-> docs were converted from Latex to ReST, and especially since the start
-> of the GHOP project.
->
-> My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2
We're getting a fair number of doc contributions, especially since the
docs were converted from Latex to ReST, and especially since the start
of the GHOP project.
My main gripe is with code contributions to Py3k and 2.6; Py3k is
mostly done by a handful of people, and almost nobody is working much
31 matches
Mail list logo
