-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 16, 2008, at 6:46 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> 'critical' is fine (or 'immediate'). My problem before was that I
> couldn't do one query that gave me all the critical issues for both
> 2.6 and 3.0. That certainly could have been pebkac though.
Benjamin Peterson writes:
> It's just depends on how you see the tracker. It's not just to "bug" tracker
> anymore, is it? On other projects I've worked with, we had separate areas
> for bugs, features, and tasks. (yes, it's SourceForge.) I found it easier to
> keep organized. However, if this
On 3/16/08, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't see a lot of objections left against using the bug tracker. I
> just talked to Neal and he's going to transfer all tasks from the 2.6
> spreadsheet to the bug tracker.
>
> I'll also be adding various other tasks., as I think of the
> It's just depends on how you see the tracker. It's not just to "bug"
> tracker anymore, is it? On other projects I've worked with, we had
> separate areas for bugs, features, and tasks. (yes, it's SourceForge.) I
> found it easier to keep organized. However, if this is Python's way, I'm
> not
Hi everyone,
with this posting I refer to a paragraph in PEP 361, which says:
"""Each non-trivial feature listed here that is not a PEP must be discussed on
python-dev. Other enhancements include:
- ...
- turtle.py replacement or enhancements
"""
Some time ago I had offered my xturtle.
