[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 581 has been updated with "Downsides of GitHub" section
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 09:56:26AM -0700, Mariatta wrote: > Hi, > > I've updated PEP 581 yesterday, adding the "Downsides of GitHub" section. > > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0581/#downsides-of-github You have missed at least one: the minimum technology requirement for using Github is a lot more stringent than for Roundup. Github's minimum system requirements are higher, and it doesn't degrade as well, so moving to Github will make it much harder for those who are using older technology. If not exclude them altogether. I'd submit a PR for this except, well, see above... -- Steven ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/GVZBROPG2M32V6COQCJPLDSRANYWACWR/
[Python-Dev] Re: PyAPI_FUNC() is needed to private APIs?
On Fri., 14 Jun. 2019, 2:05 am Steve Dower, wrote: > On 13Jun2019 0816, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2019-06-13 17:11, Steve Dower wrote: > >> The cost of that convenience is that > >> we can never optimise internals because they are now public API. > > > > I think that the opposite is true actually: the reason that people > > access internals is because there is no public API doing what they want. > > Having more public API should *reduce* the need for accessing internals. > > Right, but we need to know what API that is. We can't just make > everything public by default. > > > For example, _PyObject_GetMethod is not public API but it's useful > > functionality. So Cython is forced to reinvent _PyObject_GetMethod (i.e. > > copy verbatim that function from the CPython sources), which requires > > accessing internals. > > What's wrong with using PyObject_GetAttr() and then doing > PyType_HasFeature(Py_TYPE(descr), Py_TPFLAGS_METHOD_DESCRIPTOR) on the > result? > > More importantly, why do you need to know that it's a method descriptor > and not just a callable object that can be accessed via an attribute? > And is this something that's generally needed, or is Cython just special > (I expect Cython to be special in many situations, which is why we have > a tiered API and expect Cython-generated code to be regenerated for > different CPython versions). > We don't expect most Cython code to be regenerated for different versions - we only expect it to be recompiled, as with any other extension. Hence Jeroen's point: if something is useful enough for Cython to want to use it, it makes to provide a public API for it that hides any internal implementation details that may not remain stable across releases. Cheers, Nick. > ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/7HLMGHXBBJCBUPGYVXYC7U22DEEDUBHK/
[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 581 has been updated with "Downsides of GitHub" section
> You have missed at least one: the minimum technology requirement for > using Github is a lot more stringent than for Roundup. Github's minimum > system requirements are higher, and it doesn't degrade as well, so > moving to Github will make it much harder for those who are using older > technology. If not exclude them altogether. Is that Git or GitHub? If the latter, more JavaScript bits or something else? Skip ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6COCTJ3E2WZUA5DTAWB34NQG5H45MX7I/
[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 581 has been updated with "Downsides of GitHub" section
Excellent thought. On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:49 PM Ned Deily wrote: > > On Jun 28, 2019, at 12:56, Mariatta wrote: > > Some of the items brought up during the language summit: > > [...] > > - we should be updating devguide ahead of the actual migration, so core > developers and release managers have time to review and learn the new > workflow. (suggested by Ned Deily) > > Actually, my suggestion was (and remains :) ) that a modified devguide > branch should be created *first* as part of the migration design process, > not later during implementation. It needs to happen anyway but it would be > much more effective, I think, to have it available up front to help catch > any holes during the design and review. > > P.S. Thanks for doing this, Marietta! > > -- > Ned Deily > n...@python.org -- [] > ___ > Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/JPWPWUUYDRWNWALTVT4VIT4L6WMBNIRJ/ > ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/OQ4TWMKGDTZ5ILI7T66IWD3353BULV2Y/
[Python-Dev] 3.7.4 final delayed [Was: Python 3.7.4rc1 (and 3.6.9rc1) cutoffs ahead, now set for 2019-06-17]
On Jun 6, 2019, at 01:43, Ned Deily wrote: > > https://discuss.python.org/t/python-3-7-4rc1-and-3-6-9rc1-cutoffs-ahead-now-set-for-2019-06-17/1824 > [...] > Following the rc1 cutoff, changes merged to the > 3.7 branch will be released in 3.7.5 three months from now unless you > mark the issue as a release blocker prior to **3.7.4 final**, planned for > release on **2019-06-28**, and explain why the change should be > cherry-picked into the final release. Update: 3.7.4 final is delayed at least a few days A few last minute release blocker issues were identified shortly before 3.7.4 final was about to tagged as planned on 2019-06-28, in particular, a couple of TLS 1.3 issues which are of particular importance since we are migrating Windows and macOS installers to OpenSSL 1.1.1 with this release. We are now on hold awaiting resolutions for the remaining items and then we will need to decide whether another release candidate is needed. I am hopeful we will be able to proceed by Monday 2019-07-01; I will keep you updated. And thanks for your help! -- Ned Deily n...@python.org -- [] ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/VWI7MZLZ5CD5RRQN6QMMUZGDP4L4XP2K/
