Re: [Python-Dev] asdl.py and Python-ast.[hc]

Le Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:28:46 -0400, Benjamin Peterson a écrit : > 2013/9/26 Eli Bendersky : > > Hi All, > > > > Earlier this morning I had a slight tackle with a couple of the 3.4 > > bots (sorry everyone!). I fixed some problems in asdl.py - > > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/21d46e3ae60c - and

Re: [Python-Dev] asdl.py and Python-ast.[hc]

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:28:46 -0400, > Benjamin Peterson a écrit : > > 2013/9/26 Eli Bendersky : > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Earlier this morning I had a slight tackle with a couple of the 3.4 > > > bots (sorry everyone!). I fixed some proble

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

Nick Coghlan writes: > I'm not sure what usage model you're assuming for _ensurepip, but it > appears to be wrong. End users should be able to just run pip, and > either have it work, or else get a message from the OS vendor telling > them to install the appropriate system package. I don't un

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On 27 September 2013 15:08, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> New users on Windows and Mac OS X. I've heard many more complaints > > from folks running tutorials about the pip bootstrapping process than > > I ever have from the community at large about the GIL :P > > I bet those users are *not* runn

Re: [Python-Dev] asdl.py and Python-ast.[hc]

Am 26.09.13 15:52, schrieb Eli Bendersky: > * Should I always check-in Python-ast.h and Python-ast.c when I touch > asdl* ? The generated files are unchanged, it's only the timestamp that > changed. If they really didn't change, I don't think it matters much. I believe there is a fundamental probl

Re: [Python-Dev] asdl.py and Python-ast.[hc]

Am 26.09.13 23:00, schrieb Antoine Pitrou: > Here you are: > http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/AMD64%20Snow%20Leop%203.x/builds/28/steps/compile/logs/stdio > > Of course, when it's using "-jN" there may be a race condition :-) Could you make "make touch" a separate build step? Regards, Ma

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On 27/09/2013 15:26, Paul Moore wrote: So, for Windows users, installing a package becomes "pip install XXX". Apologies if this has already been said but it only works if you've already installed an appropriate compiler. I've lost count of the number of times I've tried this, got the (rath

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 27, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote: > Apologies if this has already been said but it only works if you've already > installed an appropriate compiler. I've lost count of the number of times > I've tried this, got the (rather cyptic) "error: Unable to find > vcvarsall.bat" mess

Re: [Python-Dev] asdl.py and Python-ast.[hc]

Le Fri, 27 Sep 2013 16:34:41 +0200, "Martin v. Löwis" a écrit : > Am 26.09.13 23:00, schrieb Antoine Pitrou: > > > Here you are: > > http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/AMD64%20Snow%20Leop%203.x/builds/28/steps/compile/logs/stdio > > > > Of course, when it's using "-jN" there may be a race c

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On 27 September 2013 15:39, Mark Lawrence wrote: > On 27/09/2013 15:26, Paul Moore wrote: > >> So, for Windows users, installing a package becomes "pip install XXX". >> > > Apologies if this has already been said but it only works if you've already > installed an appropriate compiler. I've lost c

Re: [Python-Dev] asdl.py and Python-ast.[hc]

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 7:26 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > Am 26.09.13 15:52, schrieb Eli Bendersky: > > * Should I always check-in Python-ast.h and Python-ast.c when I touch > > asdl* ? The generated files are unchanged, it's only the timestamp that > > changed. > > If they really didn't change,

Re: [Python-Dev] Official github mirror for CPython?

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Brian Curtin wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Christian Heimes > wrote: > > Am 25.07.2013 16:29, schrieb Eli Bendersky: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I've been looking for a Github mirror for Python, and found two: > >> > >> * https://github.com/python-git/pyth

[Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues

ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2013-09-20 - 2013-09-27) Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/ To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue. Do NOT respond to this message. Issues counts and deltas: open4256 (+28) closed 26624 (+22) total 30880 (+50) Open issues wit

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:26:41 +0100, Paul Moore wrote: > On 27 September 2013 15:08, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > >> New users on Windows and Mac OS X. I've heard many more complaints > > > from folks running tutorials about the pip bootstrapping process than > > > I ever have from the community

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:15 PM, R. David Murray wrote: > On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:26:41 +0100, Paul Moore wrote: >> On 27 September 2013 15:08, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> >> New users on Windows and Mac OS X. I've heard many more complaints >> > > from folks running tutorials about the pip b

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

Paul Moore writes: > I can't speak for Linux distros or OSX users, but for Windows I do > believe that this is a significant improvement, Nobody doubts this. > and worth the (IMO, negligible) risk involved in adding this to a > maintenance release. Doesn't that argument apply equally well t

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 23, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > With the last round of updates, I believe PEP 453 is ready for > Martin's pronouncement. Personally, I'm very excited and happy that this or something like it is coming close to fruition. My experiences in userland suggest that this will be

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote: > Also, I think that proponents of backporting this PEP are missing > something important. Specifically, why are we encouraging the use of > Python 2.7 for "new users"? Shouldn't we use this as an opportunity > to say, "Move to Python 3

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > On Sep 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, "Stephen J. Turnbull" > wrote: > > > Also, I think that proponents of backporting this PEP are missing > > something important. Specifically, why are we encouraging the use of > > Python 2.7 for "new users"?

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On 9/27/2013 10:26 AM, Paul Moore wrote: [snip longish post] I want to summarize the main points of what I believe Paul said and strongly agree with them. * For this issue, and especially for backporting to 2.7/3.3, we should consider Windows, Mac, and *nix distributions as separate cases. *

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 27, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > I add: for 2.7/3.3, there is consequently no need for _ensurepip to be in > /Lib after installation, even if temporarily added*. If it is not there, > there is no change the the stdlib, and hence no violation of the 'no new > features' policy.

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On 9/27/2013 3:10 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: On Sep 27, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: I add: for 2.7/3.3, there is consequently no need for _ensurepip to be in /Lib after installation, even if temporarily added*. If it is not there, there is no change the the stdlib, and hence no viola

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 27, 2013, at 4:09 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 9/27/2013 3:10 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: >> >> On Sep 27, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> >>> I add: for 2.7/3.3, there is consequently no need for _ensurepip to be in >>> /Lib after installation, even if temporarily added*. If it i

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > > If it lives in the source tree how are you going to provent it from existing > when someone installs on Linux? OSX? One of the BSDs? If someone is building their own Python from source--regardless of platform--they're obviously going t

Re: [Python-Dev] Official github mirror for CPython?

Email me the name of the repo you want, and your github username (preferably off list so I don't miss it!) and I will set you up Eli On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Brian Curtin wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Christia

[Python-Dev] Getting Tulip (PEP 3156) into the 3.4 stdlib, marked provisional, named asyncio

I've been looking at my progress with Tulip and the 3.4 release schedule (PEP 429) and it looks like I will have to do some kind of sprint to get it into the release in time for beta 1, which is planned for Nov 24. Ideally I'd get it into alpha 4, which is scheduled for Oct 20 -- that's in about th

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 26, 2013, at 02:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >- the module name should be "_ensurepip" in all versions >- the PEP should explicitly state that the "don't remove _ensurepip >and it's wheel files" caveat for redistributors applies only in 3.4+ >(where removing it will break pyvenv) I'm sorry t

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On 28 Sep 2013 00:08, "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote: > > Nick Coghlan writes: > > > I'm not sure what usage model you're assuming for _ensurepip, but it > > appears to be wrong. End users should be able to just run pip, and > > either have it work, or else get a message from the OS vendor telling

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

2013/9/27 Barry Warsaw : > On Sep 26, 2013, at 02:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > >>- the module name should be "_ensurepip" in all versions >>- the PEP should explicitly state that the "don't remove _ensurepip >>and it's wheel files" caveat for redistributors applies only in 3.4+ >>(where removing it

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Zachary Ware wrote: > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > > > > > > If it lives in the source tree how are you going to provent it from > existing when someone installs on Linux? OSX? One of the BSDs? > > If someone is building their own Pyt

Re: [Python-Dev] Getting Tulip (PEP 3156) into the 3.4 stdlib, marked provisional, named asyncio

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I've been looking at my progress with Tulip and the 3.4 release schedule > (PEP 429) and it looks like I will have to do some kind of sprint to get it > into the release in time for beta 1, which is planned for Nov 24. Ideally > I'd get i

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 27, 2013, at 9:20 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Zachary Ware > wrote: > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > > > > > > If it lives in the source tree how are you going to provent it from > > existing when someone installs on

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/27/2013 10:50 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > On Sep 27, 2013, at 9:20 PM, Brett Cannon > wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Zachary Ware >> > > wrote: >> >>

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

Nick Coghlan writes: > You have confirmed my belief that your model is incorrect. *shrug* I just think the risks are higher than acknowledged (just because you have so far failed to imagine a problem doesn't mean it won't appear), and that the meta effect that "Even Guido admits that Python 3 i

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On Sep 27, 2013, at 11:48 PM, "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote: > Nick Coghlan writes: > >> You have confirmed my belief that your model is incorrect. > > *shrug* I just think the risks are higher than acknowledged (just > because you have so far failed to imagine a problem doesn't mean it > won't

Re: [Python-Dev] Getting Tulip (PEP 3156) into the 3.4 stdlib, marked provisional, named asyncio

It sounds like a reasonable approach to me. In terms of naming, would you consider "concurrent.asyncio"? When we created that parent namespace for futures, one of the other suggested submodules discussed was the standard event loop API. Cheers, Nick. __

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 453 (pip bootstrapping) ready for pronouncement?

On 28 Sep 2013 14:12, "Donald Stufft" wrote: > > > On Sep 27, 2013, at 11:48 PM, "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote: > > > Nick Coghlan writes: > > > >> You have confirmed my belief that your model is incorrect. > > > > *shrug* I just think the risks are higher than acknowledged (just > > because you h