[Python-Dev] Re: Request for reviewers: pathlib improvements

Hi everyone, It’s been a fairly quiet couple of months in pathlib work from myself - just a couple of forum posts. Kevin Follstad has been beavering away on a PR to address bpo-24132 , I’ve promised him a review,

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 10:06 AM Eric V. Smith wrote: > > On 7/1/2021 7:39 PM, esmeraldagar...@byom.de wrote: > > "Merging something is also a responsibility to whoever does it" - And it's > > also a responsibility to fix bugs, no? I don't get why you're so afraid of > > (maybe!) introducing a

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 4:54 PM wrote: > Okay so I just code a little bit and I used the multiprocessing module but > my code didn't work and I found the solution on Stack Overflow and it > turned out to be not my mistake (which has never happened before I think). > Instead I found out it's a bug

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

Can we call this discussion closed? There’s not much more to be said. I’m not picking on you, Chris, I just think that not much will be gained by continuing the thread. I appreciate Esmeralda’s messages and all the responses. Now let’s go fix some bugs! :-) (Obligatory XKCD comic:

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

esmeraldagarcia＠byom.de wrote: >> "If you would like more value out of it or to speed >> up the process, you can provide your own reviews." - > Seriously? I can't help but feel like that comment > sounds kinda arrogant. I've done it and it sometimes helps. That said, there is still a problem

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

On 7/1/2021 7:39 PM, esmeraldagar...@byom.de wrote: "Merging something is also a responsibility to whoever does it" - And it's also a responsibility to fix bugs, no? I don't get why you're so afraid of (maybe!) introducing a new bug when there already (certainly!) is a bug. Because the new

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

Okay so I just code a little bit and I used the multiprocessing module but my code didn't work and I found the solution on Stack Overflow and it turned out to be not my mistake (which has never happened before I think). Instead I found out it's a bug in Python and the issue on Github was linked

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

On 7/1/2021 7:04 PM, Christopher Barker wrote: PS: All that being said, we, as a community, could do better. For instance, someone like me could do high-level triage on bug reports -- I need to set aside some time to do that. In addition/instead of triage, one thing we (as core maintainers)

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

Thanks Brian for your nice summary! Let me complete it. Warning: I didn't look at https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/4819 at all. My email is a really general remark on the Python workflow. You in this email is not the OP, but "any contributor" ;-) What contributors don't see is that

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:49 AM Victor Stinner wrote: > What happens usually is that some modules have no maintainer. Once you > merge a single change in a module, boom! You are now the new > maintainer for your entire life time! More and more people will ask > you to look at their "very

[Python-Dev] Re: Critique of PEP 657

Hi Terry, > IDLE currently uses traceback.extract_tb and traceback.print_list Awesome, that should work out perfectly then. Our current proof-of-concept implementation augments the traceback.FrameSummary class to include `end_lineno`, `colno` and `end_colno` attributes. We will make sure to add

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

Just to add a comment from someone who's been around Python a long time -- a (very) occasional contributor, never a maintainer. I have every sympathy for the core maintainers -- Python is a very large and complex project that is relied on by an enormous number of people. The size and complexity