Martin v. Löwis, 20.02.2010 13:08:
Actually this should not be a fork of the upstream library.
The goal is to improve stability and predictability of the ElementTree
implementations in the stdlib, and to fix some bugs.
I thought that it is better to backport the fixes from upstream than to
2010/2/28 Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de
I would actually encourage Florent to do the opposite: act now and prepare
a patch against the latest official ET 1.2 and cET releases (or their SVN
version respectively) that integrates everything that is considered safe,
i.e. everything that makes
Florent XICLUNA, 01.03.2010 00:36:
I exchanged some e-mails with Fredrik last week. Not sure if it will be
1.2.8 or 1.3, but now he is positive on the goals of the patch. I've
commited all the changes and external fixes to a branch of the Mercurial
repo owned by Fredrik. I'm expecting an
We need someone to maintain the copy of ElementTree in the Python
repository.
We have one: Fredrik Lundh.
Ideally this means pulling upgrades and bugfixes from
Fredrik's repository every now and then. If the goals of Python
ElementTree and Fredrik ElementTree diverge I don't see a problem
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
We need someone to maintain the copy of ElementTree in the Python
repository.
We have one: Fredrik Lundh.
The last commits by Fredrik to ElementTree in Python SVN that I can
see are dated 2006-08-16. The last commits I
Florent Xicluna, 18.02.2010 10:21:
For this purpose, I grew the test suite from 300 lines to 1800 lines, using
both
the tests from upstream and the tests proposed by Neil Muller on issue #6232.
Just a comment on this. While the new tests may work with ElementTree as
is, there are a couple of
Stefan Behnel stefan_ml at behnel.de writes:
Florent Xicluna, 18.02.2010 10:21:
For this purpose, I grew the test suite from 300 lines to 1800 lines,
using both the tests from upstream and the tests proposed by Neil Muller
on issue #6232.
Just a comment on this. While the new tests
Florent Xicluna, 20.02.2010 11:53:
Stefan Behnel writes:
None of theses features is really required to hold for anything but the
current as-is implementation.
I agree.
So my impression is that many of the tests try to provide guarantees where
they cannot or should not exist, and even
Martin v. Löwis martin at v.loewis.de writes:
If the goals of Python ElementTree and Fredrik ElementTree diverge I don't
see a problem with an amicable fork.
I see one: Fredrik will not consider such a fork amicable. Of course, if
you could make him state in public that he is fine with a
The last commits by Fredrik to ElementTree in Python SVN that I can
see are dated 2006-08-16. The last commits I can see to ElementTree at
http://svn.effbot.python-hosting.com/ are dated 2006-07-05.
And?
To paraphrase Antoine's comment [1] on Rietveld -- we need a process
that results in
Actually this should not be a fork of the upstream library.
The goal is to improve stability and predictability of the ElementTree
implementations in the stdlib, and to fix some bugs.
I thought that it is better to backport the fixes from upstream than to
fix each bug separately in the
Le Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:08:39 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
Please be EXTREMELY careful. I urge you not to act on this until
mid-March (which is the earliest time at which Fredrik has said he may
have time to look into this).
Ok, so let's wait until then before we make a decision.
cheers
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
I'd rather drop ElementTree from the standard library than fork it.
Fork what? Upstream ElementTree is dead.
Schiavo
Simon
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
-On [20100220 13:04], Martin v. Löwis (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote:
The last commits by Fredrik to ElementTree in Python SVN that I can
see are dated 2006-08-16. The last commits I can see to ElementTree at
http://svn.effbot.python-hosting.com/ are dated 2006-07-05.
And?
[snip]
# Since you've
Maybe I am fully misunderstanding something here and I am also known for
just bluntly stating things but:
Isn't inclusion into the standard library under the assumption that
maintenance will be performed on the code?
In general, that's the assumption, and Guido has stated that he dislikes
-On [20100220 22:47], Martin v. Löwis (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote:
In general, that's the assumption, and Guido has stated that he dislikes
exceptions. However, Fredrik's code was included only under the
exception. ElementTree wouldn't be part of the standard library if an
exception had not been
-On [20100219 08:37], Simon Cross (hodgestar+python...@gmail.com) wrote:
We need someone to maintain the copy of ElementTree in the Python
repository. Ideally this means pulling upgrades and bugfixes from
Fredrik's repository every now and then.
Which will give you nothing as that tree hasn't
All, I hope that Fredrik himself has time to chime in at least
briefly, but he told me off-line that he sees nothing controversial in
the currently proposed set of changes.
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
asmo...@in-nomine.org wrote:
-On [20100219 08:37], Simon
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 06:40:00 +0100, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:46:41 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
It's time to comment and review.
Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
the code base without explicit
It's time to comment and review.
Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
the code base without explicit approval by Fredrik Lundh.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Le Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:46:41 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
It's time to comment and review.
Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
the code base without explicit approval by Fredrik Lundh.
Which most probably puts elementtree in bugfix-only mode. I don't
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:46:41 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
It's time to comment and review.
Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
the code base without explicit approval by Fredrik Lundh.
Which most probably puts elementtree in
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Which most probably puts elementtree in bugfix-only mode. I don't
necessarily disagree with such a decision, but it must be quite clear.
The current situation is even worse than bugfix-only mode. Even
bugfixes struggle
23 matches
Mail list logo
