Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was referring to this for 1.1. Or are you saying that some part of the licensing / legalistic stuff that goes on (invisibly to many of us) means that you can't put any "outsider contributions" into what you ship?
At 01:02 PM 9/15/2006, Dino Viehland wrote >Unfortunately we cannot currently accept changes back into the IronPython core >right now. :( > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of J. Merrill >Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:58 AM >To: Discussion of IronPython >Subject: Re: [IronPython] socket for IronPython update > >Is there a reason not to pick up Seo's version? His "license" ("do whatever >... you want") would certainly allow it. Is the wheel he built not round >enough? > >At 11:40 AM 9/11/2006, Dino Viehland wrote >>Originally we were trying to implement "_socket" instead of "socket". We ran >>into one problem with this: the standard socket.py module has an implicit >>dependency upon CPython's reference counting garbage collector (for >>implementing dup). We considered a hack to make this work but ultimately >>rejected it in favor of implementing "socket" instead replacing the standard >>Python module. Unfortunately makefile didn't make it - and that looks like >>the same thing for ssl (it's present in CPythons socket but not _socket). >> >>Select was a much simpler case of just not getting to it in time. We'll ship >>a select implementation w/ the 1.1 release - we'll need to look at makefile & >>ssl though (makefile should be trivial, hopefully ssl will be just as >>trivial). J. Merrill / Analytical Software Corp _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
