Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

Kurt B. Kaiser: > I'm mystified about the comments that the GUI is ugly.  It is minimal. > On XP, it looks exactly like an XP window with a simple menubar.  Those > who haven't looked at it for awhile may not be aware of the recent > advances made by Tk in native look and feel.  What is ugly?

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] IRC culture (was: Removing IDLE from the standard library)

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:51:35 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote: > I have been attempting to fill this hole and have been faced with > animosity from people who "hang out" on the python-dev IRC channel. I > thought it was a complete and utter waste of space, so I don't intend > going back. I would like

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > +1. Don't be afraid. We are quite good at pointing out mistakes after > the fact :) Just make sure to subscribe to python-checkins and keep an eye out for replies to your commits. Most post hoc review comments come in as replies to the com

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On 12/07/2010 15:42, Nick Coghlan wrote: On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: +1. Don't be afraid. We are quite good at pointing out mistakes after the fact :) Just make sure to subscribe to python-checkins and keep an eye out for replies to your commits. Most post

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Michael Foord wrote: > That mailing list (python-checkins) is way too high traffic for many > committers to monitor. I hope people making comments on checkins also email > the committer directly. Not normally, no - there's no easy way to connect a checkin message

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:44 AM, Bill Janssen wrote: > Steve, you encouraged me to try it again.  From an xterm on OS X 10.5.8, > it launches fine (long as you know where it is -- > /System/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/Current/bin/idle). > Seems to work OK for what it is, too.  Sam

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On 12/07/2010 16:52, Nick Coghlan wrote: On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Michael Foord wrote: That mailing list (python-checkins) is way too high traffic for many committers to monitor. I hope people making comments on checkins also email the committer directly. Not normally, no -

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Ron Adam wrote: > There might be another alternative. > > Both idle and pydoc are applications (are there others?) that are in the > standard library. As such, they or parts of them, are possibly importable > to other projects. That restricts changes because a c

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On 12/07/2010 19:21, Ian Bicking wrote: On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Ron Adam > wrote: There might be another alternative. Both idle and pydoc are applications (are there others?) that are in the standard library. As such, they or parts of them, are

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Kurt B. Kaiser wrote: > Also, the current right click edit action on Windows is to only open an > edit window; no shell.  And it uses the subprocess!  So, some of the > comments on this thread are not up to date. > > The reason that bug languished for two years was

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 00:11, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: There's a one-to-one mapping somewhere. >>> >>> Unfortunately, no: we don't have email addresses of all committers. >> >> What about the python-committers mailing list? That has at least all >> the active ones, correct? > > Probably. Als

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:34, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 7/14/2010 4:10 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: > > Sure, and if it was work time, we probably would do this ;). As it is >> right now, this is volunteer time, and I would say that we're entitled >> to do whatever helps us getting done the (not alwa

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

2010/7/14 Guilherme Polo : > 2010/7/14 Terry Reedy : >> On 7/14/2010 2:35 AM, Giampaolo Rodolà wrote: >>> >>> One of the main problems with IDLE is the lack of tabs for editing >>> multiple files within the same window. >>> Having that alone would be a great improvement. >> >> Yes, the same as tabs

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] Removing IDLE from the standard library

http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/2.7.html#ttk-themed-widgets-for-tk Sorry, I realized just now that ttk is already included in Python 2.7 and 3.2. 2010/7/14 Giampaolo Rodolà : > 2010/7/14 Guilherme Polo : >> 2010/7/14 Terry Reedy : >>> On 7/14/2010 2:35 AM, Giampaolo Rodolà wrote: One

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] IDLE contributors and committers

On 17/07/2010 12:47, Steve Holden wrote: On 7/17/2010 7:33 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Hello, On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 02:05:22 +0300 Tal Einat wrote: I would like to propose removing IDLE from the standard library. I have been using IDLE since 2002 and have been doing my best to help mai

[Idle-dev] What to do with languishing patches?

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote: > On 17/07/2010 22:57, Terry Reedy wrote: .. >> I am certainly reluctant to recruit others to help, as I did for #9222, >> if there will be no action indefinitely. >> > > This is standard Python behavour.  The worst case I've come across is a >

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] What to do with languishing patches?

On 18 July 2010 20:57, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote: > > On Jul 18, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > We already have "posponed" and "remind" resolutions, but these are > exclusive of "accepted".   I think there should be a clear way to mark > the issue "accepted and would be applied if X

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] What to do with languishing patches?

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On 18 July 2010 20:57, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote: .. >> This is what branches are for. >> When the X.Y release cycle starts, there should be a branch for X.Y.  Any >> "would be applied" patches can simply be applied to trunk without >> interrupting

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] What to do with languishing patches?

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:10 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >> Maybe going off on a tangent, but I find it frustrating because you >> (plural) can't find a given module on the issue tracker. Say I'm looking >> for issues relating to smtplib, all I can do is look in the title of the >> issue. Have I

Re: [Idle-dev] [Python-Dev] What to do with languishing patches?

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:55 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote: .. > Is this the same login as for the issue tracker or is a new one needed? > AFAIK, it is separate. > I also suspect that subsections for Extension Modules would be extremely > useful for our C developers, thoughts anybody? Well, with the