ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2014-12-12 - 2014-12-19)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.
Issues counts and deltas:
open4683 (+17)
closed 30168 (+31)
total 34851 (+48)
Open issues wit
On 19 December 2014 at 23:01, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 09:52:26 +
> Paul Moore wrote:
> > On 19 December 2014 at 08:26, Maciej Fijalkowski
> wrote:
> > > I would like to add that "not doing anything" is not a good strategy
> > > either, because you accumulate bugs that ge
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 09:52:26 +
Paul Moore wrote:
> On 19 December 2014 at 08:26, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> > I would like to add that "not doing anything" is not a good strategy
> > either, because you accumulate bugs that get fixed upstream (I'm
> > pretty sure all the problems from cpytho
On 19.12.2014 10:52, Paul Moore wrote:
> Probably the easiest way of moving this forward would be for someone
> to identify the CPython-specific patches in the current version, and
> check if they are addressed in the latest libffi version. They haven't
> been applied as they are, I gather, but may
On 19 December 2014 at 08:26, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> I would like to add that "not doing anything" is not a good strategy
> either, because you accumulate bugs that get fixed upstream (I'm
> pretty sure all the problems from cpython got fixed in upstream
> libffi, but not all libffi fixes mad
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014, at 14:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> ... http://bugs.python.org/issue23085 ...
>> is there any reason any more for libffi being included in CPython?
>
> [And why a fork, instead of just treating it as an external
