On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:18:04 -0700, Ned Deily wrote:
> In article <20121016043352.ga21...@snakebite.org>,
> Trent Nelson wrote:
> > Any objections to regenerating configure with autoconf 2.69? The
> > current version is based off 2.68, which was release on the 22nd
> > of September
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:12:35AM -0700, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:18:04 -0700, Ned Deily wrote:
> > In article <20121016043352.ga21...@snakebite.org>,
> > Trent Nelson wrote:
> > > Any objections to regenerating configure with autoconf 2.69? The
> > > current ver
In article <20121016071236.0792d250...@webabinitio.net>,
"R. David Murray" wrote:
> My understanding is that we use a specific version of autoconf.
> The reason is that otherwise we end up with useless churn in the repo
> as the generated file changes when different committers use different
> ver
On 14.10.12 21:38, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
In case nobody picks it up, my 5-for-1 offer still stands: if you review
five issues, I'll review one of yours.
What 50 issues you want I'll review.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http:
> My understanding is that we use a specific version of autoconf.
> The reason is that otherwise we end up with useless churn in the repo
> as the generated file changes when different committers use different
> versions. In the past we have had issues with a new autoconf version
> actually breaki
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 01:04:46AM -0700, Ned Deily wrote:
> In article <20121016071236.0792d250...@webabinitio.net>,
> "R. David Murray" wrote:
> > My understanding is that we use a specific version of autoconf.
> > The reason is that otherwise we end up with useless churn in the repo
> > as the
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 01:43:37AM -0700, Charles-François Natali wrote:
> > My understanding is that we use a specific version of autoconf.
> > The reason is that otherwise we end up with useless churn in the repo
> > as the generated file changes when different committers use different
> > versio
Charles-François Natali wrote:
> Well, so I guess all committers will have to use the same
> Linux/FreeBSD/whatever distribution then?
> AFAICT there's no requirement regarding the mercurial version used by
> committers either.
It should be sufficient to install autoconf-x.y into /home/user/bin o
> It should be sufficient to install autoconf-x.y into /home/user/bin or
> something similar. Installing autoconf from source really takes about
> 3 minutes.
Well, maybe, maybe not.
autoconf depends on a least m4 and Perl, and you may very well have a
compatibility issue here.
That's why most dist
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:12:35AM -0700, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:18:04 -0700, Ned Deily wrote:
> > In article <20121016043352.ga21...@snakebite.org>,
> > Trent Nelson wrote:
> > > Any objections to regenerating configure with autoconf 2.69? The
> > > current ver
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:05:23 -0400
Trent Nelson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 01:43:37AM -0700, Charles-François Natali wrote:
> > > My understanding is that we use a specific version of autoconf.
> > > The reason is that otherwise we end up with useless churn in the repo
> > > as the generated
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 02:17:35AM -0700, Charles-François Natali wrote:
> > It should be sufficient to install autoconf-x.y into /home/user/bin or
> > something similar. Installing autoconf from source really takes about
> > 3 minutes.
>
> Well, maybe, maybe not.
> autoconf depends on a least m4
Trent Nelson wrote:
> > build breaking is another matter, of course. If we are
> > going to mandate a specific version again, that should be documented and
> > checked for.
>
> My preference: bump to 2.69 and set AC_PREREQ(2.69). If 2.69 proves
> unworkable, revert back to 2.68 and AC_PRE
Am 16.10.2012 um 12:15 schrieb andrew.svetlov :
> + For easy to use interface to system randomness please see
> + :class:`random.SystemRandom`.
Is it just my non-native speaker ears, or should there be an “an” before “easy”?
___
Python-Dev mailing l
I dont feel anything wrong with it, but I'm also not native speaker.
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Hynek Schlawack wrote:
> Am 16.10.2012 um 12:15 schrieb andrew.svetlov :
>
>> + For easy to use interface to system randomness please see
>> + :class:`random.SystemRandom`.
>
> Is it just my
On 10/16/2012 11:23 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote:
Am 16.10.2012 um 12:15 schrieb andrew.svetlov :
+ For easy to use interface to system randomness please see
+ :class:`random.SystemRandom`.
Is it just my non-native speaker ears, or should there be an “an” before “easy”?
There should. And "
Am 16.10.2012 12:43, schrieb Larry Hastings:
> On 10/16/2012 11:23 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote:
>> Am 16.10.2012 um 12:15 schrieb andrew.svetlov :
>>
>>> + For easy to use interface to system randomness please see
>>> + :class:`random.SystemRandom`.
>> Is it just my non-native speaker ears, or sh
Well. I rephrased text following suggestion from Larry Hastings.
If there are need more clarification please reopen #15936
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Am 16.10.2012 12:43, schrieb Larry Hastings:
>> On 10/16/2012 11:23 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote:
>>> Am 16.10.2012
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 12:52:25 +0200
Christian Heimes wrote:
> Am 16.10.2012 12:43, schrieb Larry Hastings:
> > On 10/16/2012 11:23 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote:
> >> Am 16.10.2012 um 12:15 schrieb andrew.svetlov :
> >>
> >>> + For easy to use interface to system randomness please see
> >>> + :clas
Antoine Pitrou writes:
> But, yes, I would call it "higher level" rather than "easy to use"
> (I don't think there's a need for hyphens, by the way).
You don't need them to get the point across, but elderly grammar
pedants will think better of you if you use the hyphens.
Personally, I hope the
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:51:21 +0200 (CEST)
nick.coghlan wrote:
>
> + # We can use a with statement to ensure threads are cleaned up promptly
> with concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=5) as executor:
> - future_to_url = dict((executor.submit(load_url, url, 60), url)
> -
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:58 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Adding an "url" attribute here looks a bit ugly to me. Why not use a
> dict comprehension for future_to_url?
No reason other than the fact it didn't occur to me to do so. Fixed :)
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com
> Hello, I have some issues pending 'patch review' hanging for more than
>> two weeks, could somebody please check them out?
>>
>
> In case nobody picks it up, my 5-for-1 offer still stands: if you review
> five issues, I'll review one of yours.
>
Is that a general offer or just for the OP? :-)
Se
On Oct 16, 2012, at 05:32 AM, Trent Nelson wrote:
> Anyway, back to the original question: does anyone know of reasons
> we shouldn't bump to 2.69? Any known incompatibilities?
There will be problems building with 2.69 on Ubuntus older than 12.10,
and Debians older than wheezy.
% rmadison autoc
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:27:24AM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:05:23 -0400
> Trent Nelson wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 01:43:37AM -0700, Charles-François Natali wrote:
> > > > My understanding is that we use a specific version of autoconf.
> > > > The reason is that
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 5:51 AM, nick.coghlan
wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a3f27289ec68
> changeset: 79746:a3f27289ec68
> branch: 3.3
> + except Exception as exc:
> + print('%r generated an exception: %s' % (url, exc))
> else:
> -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/16/2012 09:47 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2012, at 05:32 AM, Trent Nelson wrote:
>
>> Anyway, back to the original question: does anyone know of reasons
>> we shouldn't bump to 2.69? Any known incompatibilities?
>
> There will be pro
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/16/2012 09:47 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 2012, at 05:32 AM, Trent Nelson wrote:
> >
> >> Anyway, back to the original question: does anyone know of reasons
> >> we shouldn'
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 08:23:00AM -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Tres Seaver
>wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> On 10/16/2012 09:47 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 2012, at 05:32 AM, Trent Nelson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-16 at 10:59 +0200, Stefan Krah wrote:
> Charles-François Natali wrote:
> > Well, so I guess all committers will have to use the same
> > Linux/FreeBSD/whatever distribution then?
> > AFAICT there's no requirement regarding the mercurial version used by
> > committers either.
>
> I
On 2012-10-16 12:59, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Antoine Pitrou writes:
> But, yes, I would call it "higher level" rather than "easy to use"
> (I don't think there's a need for hyphens, by the way).
You don't need them to get the point across, but elderly grammar
pedants will think better of
Trent Nelson wrote:
[SNIP]
diff -r 51ce9830d85a configure.ac
--- a/configure.ac Sat Oct 13 11:58:23 2012 -0400
+++ b/configure.ac Tue Oct 16 09:12:56 2012 +
@@ -9,6 +9,9 @@
AC_INIT(python, PYTHON_VERSION, http://bugs.python.org/)
+BUILDDIR="`pwd`"
^
http://www.gnu.
32 matches
Mail list logo
