On Sep 29, 2010, at 11:11 PM, geremy condra wrote:
P.S. I also encountered a small difficulty in implementing #2 that would
still need to be resolved if that option is chosen.
What's the issue, if you don't mind me asking?
IIRC, just commenting-out the Py_AnySet checks in set_or, set_xor,
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I don't know how hg manages this, but can't we preserve the tag
information of the tags that you've scheduled to be removed
in some place that can easily be pulled in but doesn't
affect the main repo size ?
Most certainly, and this is the plan already: we will keep
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 20:32, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
I would like to recommend that the Python core developers start using
a code review tool such as Rietveld or Reviewboard. I don't really
care which tool we use (I'm sure there are plenty of pros and cons to
each) but I do
Hi,
On using code review tools: +1, no discussion.
I've recently been doing a bit of research on these as a side effect of
researching continuous deployment, so:
1. Barry is right about Launchpad's merge proposals (unsurprisingly)
2. hg has a review extension called hg-review, but I think
Barry Warsaw writes:
You can have co-located branches[1] which essentially switch
in-place, so if a branch is changing some .c files, you won't have
to rebuild the whole world just to try out a patch.
In Mercurial these are called named branches, and they are
repo-local (by which I mean
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 01:23:24PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:03, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
A problem with that is that we regularly make matching improvements to
upload.py
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 07:45:52AM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Somewhat amusing to get to this thread a few minutes after creating a
Reitveld issue for the first pass of my urllib.parse patch :)
Hello Nick, could you please point me to that?
Also, in general here are my points on Code Review
Sorry for following up to myself, but this typo might be very
confusing:
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
Barry Warsaw writes:
You can have co-located branches[1] which essentially switch
in-place, so if a branch is changing some .c files, you won't have
to rebuild the whole world
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Am 26.09.2010 00:48, schrieb Georg Brandl:
Am 26.09.2010 00:16, schrieb Martin v. Löwis:
Redirect wiki.python.org to the Python wiki front page, and put the Jython
wiki somewhere on its own (whether it's wiki.jython.org
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Does this violate the Sequence ABC (assuming there is one)?
There is a Sequence ABC, but it does not define __add__. It only defines
the following methods:
__contains__, __getitem__, __iter__, __len__, __reversed__, count,
On 29 September 2010 22:25, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
I don't think it should be in the gc module, but I would prefer it be enabled
and controlled through a separate module, rather than something Python does
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Raymond Hettinger
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
1a. Liberalize setobject.c binary operator methods, restrict SetABC
methods, and add named methods (like difference, update, etc) that accept
any iterable.
2. We could liberalize builtin set objects to
The torrential rains are causing havoc with my internet, so apologies for
replying out of sequence.
On Sep 30, 2010, at 07:17 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Sorry for following up to myself, but this typo might be very
confusing:
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
Barry Warsaw writes:
You can
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
I would like to recommend that the Python core developers start using
a code review tool such as Rietveld or Reviewboard. I don't really
care which tool we use (I'm sure there are plenty of pros and cons to
each) but I
On 02:47 pm, jnol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org
wrote:
I would like to recommend that the Python core developers start using
a code review tool such as Rietveld or Reviewboard. I don't really
care which tool we use (I'm sure there are
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:52 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On 02:47 pm, jnol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org
wrote:
I would like to recommend that the Python core developers start using
a code review tool such as Rietveld or
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 7:52 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On 02:47 pm, jnol...@gmail.com wrote:
Regardless of the tool(s) used, code reviews are a fantastic
equalizer. If you have long time, experienced developers submitting
to the same rules that newer contributors have to follow
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:52:18 -
exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
Regardless of the tool(s) used, code reviews are a fantastic
equalizer. If you have long time, experienced developers submitting
to the same rules that newer contributors have to follow then it helps
remove the idea that
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:52 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
Of course, this is only true if the core developers *do* submit to the same
rules. Is anyone proposing that current core committers have all their work
reviewed before it is accepted?
I think most would welcome (or at least
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:52 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
Of course, this is only true if the core developers *do* submit to the
same
rules. Is anyone proposing that current core committers have all their
work reviewed before it is accepted?
For large patches it is
The hard part is encouraging contributors to find the time and
motivation to thoroughly review code that they aren't personally
interested in (and perhaps not even familiar with).
Not sure how well 'tit for tat' schemes work - we *could* require
that people don't commit unreviewed changes, and
Am 30.09.2010 17:40, schrieb Senthil Kumaran:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:52 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
Of course, this is only true if the core developers *do* submit to the
same
rules. Is anyone proposing that current core committers have all their
work reviewed
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.dewrote:
Not sure how well 'tit for tat' schemes work - we *could* require
that people don't commit unreviewed changes, and also require that
you can't commit unless you have reviewed somebody else's changes.
I wonder if a
Am 29.09.2010 20:49, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
Unfortunately taking the average patch posted to the tracker and
importing it in Rietveld is very iffy -- it's very hard to find the
right branch+rev needed to be able to apply the patch correctly -- not
to mention that there are so many
On Sep 30, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Not to mention; there's a lot to be learned from doing them on both
sides. At work, I learn about chunks of code I might not have
otherwise known about or approaches to a problem I'd never considered.
I sort of drank the kool-aid.
Tools aside, I
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 30, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Not to mention; there's a lot to be learned from doing them on both
sides. At work, I learn about chunks of code I might not have
otherwise known about or approaches to a
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:53 PM, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 30, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Not to mention; there's a lot to be learned from doing them on both
sides. At work, I learn about
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:31, Daniel Stutzbach
dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:52 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
Of course, this is only true if the core developers *do* submit to the
same rules. Is anyone proposing that current core committers have
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 08:31, Daniel Stutzbach
dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:52 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
Of course, this is only true if the core developers *do* submit to the
same rules. Is anyone proposing that current core committers have all
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:19, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
Am 29.09.2010 20:49, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
Unfortunately taking the average patch posted to the tracker and
importing it in Rietveld is very iffy -- it's very hard to find the
right branch+rev needed to be able to apply
Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org writes:
Barry Warsaw writes:
You can have co-located branches[1] which essentially switch
in-place, so if a branch is changing some .c files, you won't have
to rebuild the whole world just to try out a patch.
In Mercurial these are called named
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
(I am strongly in favor of this, but I don't think many core committers
are.)
Having worked in this style for almost 5 years now, I am also strongly
in favor. Jesse expressed it better than I could.
I'll be one of
Amaury just filed issue #1 yesterday; as counting started
with 1000, we are now into 9000 roundup issues.
I have become quite fond of roundup over the years, and would
like to thank Ka-Ping Yee, Richard Jones, and Erik Forsberg
for getting us here.
There are many contributions to this
Hello,
It seems the py3k docs (both dev and 3.1) haven't been rebuilt for a few
days. Is there anything that needs to be done to trigger rebuilding?
Thank you,
Antoine.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
Amaury just filed issue #1 yesterday; as counting started with
1000, we are now into 9000 roundup issues.
Congratulations!
I have become quite fond of roundup over the years, and would like to
thank Ka-Ping Yee, Richard Jones, and Erik Forsberg
Barry Warsaw writes:
I should note that I don't particularly like colocated/named branches. I
personally much prefer separate directories for each feature or bug I'm
working on. It helps me keep track of what I'm doing. I have a fast machine
so recompiling all of Python is no big deal.
Am 01.10.2010 03:13, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
Hello,
It seems the py3k docs (both dev and 3.1) haven't been rebuilt for a few
days. Is there anything that needs to be done to trigger rebuilding?
Yes, I noticed it in my cronjob email. It seems latex has a problem with
c-api.tex; I'll have a
Am 01.10.2010 01:50, schrieb Martin v. Löwis:
Amaury just filed issue #1 yesterday; as counting started
with 1000, we are now into 9000 roundup issues.
So, nitpickly, it would be 9001. But of course, we're already at
10003 anyway :)
I have become quite fond of roundup over the years, and
Am 30.09.2010 10:22, schrieb Dirkjan Ochtman:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 20:32, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
I would like to recommend that the Python core developers start using
a code review tool such as Rietveld or Reviewboard. I don't really
care which tool we use (I'm sure there
39 matches
Mail list logo
