On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't care much what that mechanism is, but I think the easiest way
to get there is to tell people to extend distutils with a test command
(or use Distribute) and perhaps add such a command in 3.4 that will do
the
Terry Reedy writes:
or a proposal for a change that is given within a bug tracker message?
I view a proposal for a change as just an idea. Such usually get
re-written by whoever creates an actual patch.
Precisely how U.S. law would view it, implying no copyright issue.
If this really
On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
In principle maybe. Need to talk with the trial developers, nose
developers, py.test developers etc - to get consensus on a number of
internal API friction points.
Some of trial's lessons might be also useful for the
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Glyph gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
In principle maybe. Need to talk with the trial developers, nose
developers, py.test developers etc - to get consensus on a number of
internal
On 5 Mar 2013, at 07:19, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 15:47:37 -0800
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 13:26:57 -0800
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 Mar 2013, at 09:02, Glyph gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
In principle maybe. Need to talk with the trial developers, nose
developers, py.test developers etc - to get consensus on a number of
internal API
On 5 Mar 2013, at 05:39, Jeff Hardy jdha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 1 Mar 2013, at 18:38, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:32:23 -0500
Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 3/4/2013 11:36 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Brian Curtin br...@python.org
mailto:br...@python.org wrote:
With this in place I would like to propose that all patches submitted to
Le 05/03/2013 04:13, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
Mark Lawrence writes:
People already use the bug tracker as an excuse not to contribute,
wouldn't this requirement make the situation worse?
A failure to sign the CLA is already a decision not to contribute to
the distribution
my 2
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Jeff Hardy jdha...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you misremembered - there's lots of code that uses
`sys.platform == 'win32'` to detect Windows, but sys.platform is 'cli'
for IronPython. I'm pretty sure `os.name has always been 'nt' (when
running on Windows), and if
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:55 AM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com
fwierzbi...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been thinking that this is a bit of a historical mistake on our
part. I'm strongly considering setting os.name properly in Jython3.
In fairness to Jython implementers past - it wasn't a mistake but a
On Mar 05, 2013, at 02:11 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
Doesn't setuptools/distribute already have a setup.py test command? That
seems like the easiest way forward?
Yes, and in theory it can make `python setup.py test` work well. But there
are lots of little details (such as API differences for
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Mar 05, 2013, at 02:11 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
Doesn't setuptools/distribute already have a setup.py test command? That
seems like the easiest way forward?
Yes, and in theory it can make `python setup.py test` work well.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Baptiste Carvello
de...@baptiste-carvello.net wrote:
Le 05/03/2013 04:13, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
Mark Lawrence writes:
People already use the bug tracker as an excuse not to contribute,
wouldn't this requirement make the situation worse?
A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Mar 05, 2013, at 02:11 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
Doesn't setuptools/distribute already have a setup.py test command?
That seems like the easiest way forward?
Yes, and in theory it can make `python setup.py test` work
Looking on PEP http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/ and docs I
don't figure out how to specify this values.
Maybe I've missed something?
If not I like to solve that problem at us pycon sprints.
Hope, Martin von Loewis will visit the conference.
--
Thanks,
Andrew Svetlov
On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 15:22:07 -0500, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Baptiste Carvello
de...@baptiste-carvello.net wrote:
Le 05/03/2013 04:13, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
Mark Lawrence writes:
People already use the bug tracker as an excuse
On 6 Mar 2013 05:51, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Mar 05, 2013, at 02:11 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
Doesn't setuptools/distribute already have a setup.py test command? That
seems like the easiest way forward?
Yes, and in theory it can make `python setup.py test` work well. But
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Donald Stufft donald.stu...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't care much what that mechanism is, but I think the easiest way
to get there is to tell people to extend distutils with a test command
(or use Distribute) and perhaps add such a command in 3.4 that will do
the
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 5 March 2013 20:02, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
What's needed here is not a tool that can run all unittests in
existence, but an official way for automated tools to run tests, with
the ability for
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't care much what that mechanism is, but I think the easiest way
to get there is to tell people to extend distutils with a test command
(or use
21 matches
Mail list logo
