Dino Viehland wrote:
Just to be clear - we could probably redistrubte a modified standard library if
we wanted to, the bar for that is probably not too high compared to
contributions. But we've made a conscious decision to not do this - we'd like
to get the point where we can give our changes back to the CPython community
rather than forking the library. So yes we did ask the wrong question but we
also meant to :)
Fair enough then. I'm just putting together a patch and will ask the
guys on Python-Dev if we can get it into Python 2.6. You'll have to help
me remember to pull it out once we have frames again!
I might not be able to sneak the patch in on 2.6-maint, so it might have
to wait until 2.7.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Foord
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 2:39 PM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] Logging module
Curt Hagenlocher wrote:
That would require lawyers and nothing which involves lawyers is
simple. :(
If you already have permission to distribute the standard library then
it is unfortunate that *more* permission is needed to modify it. Sounds
like the wrong question was asked. :-(
Oh well - good that this is being worked on.
But let's say that someone else were to patch the logging module to
test for the presence of sys._getframe and perform an appropriate
fallback when it's not present. If this patch were then submitted
back to Python and incorporated into the standard Python library, we'd
naturally pick up and take advantage of the change...
I'll see what I can do.
Michael
We're working on fixing this process, of course.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Michael Foord
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Codeplex item 21122 has just been closed: Python 2.5.2 logging
module doesn't work
http://www.codeplex.com/IronPython/WorkItem/View.aspx?WorkItemId=21122
As far as I can tell it has been closed because _getframe support
is needed for it to work. Instead why not distribute a patched
version like FePy does?
That would seem a much better solution until _getframe is
implemented and exactly the sort of thing that distributing the
standard library would allow the IronPython team to do?
Michael
--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
