> The Python sandbox has a setuptools directory. Is this the canonical
> location for the code?
Yes, it is.
> If so, then anybody who has Python commit
> privileges can commit to it and help further develop setuptools.
They can, but they shouldn't. Nothing should be committed there
without
At 05:15 PM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > At 03:57 AM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
> >> Are you open to giving certain others patch view/commit privileges to
> >> setuptools?
> >
> > Jim Fulton has such already. I'm open to extending that to others who
> > have
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 03:57 AM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>> Are you open to giving certain others patch view/commit privileges to
>> setuptools?
>
> Jim Fulton has such already. I'm open to extending that to others who
> have a good grasp of the subtleties involved.
>
> Truthfully
Phillip J. Eby writes:
> >7. Many wanted to ability to install files anywhere in the install tree and
> > not just under the Python package. Under distutils this was possible
> > but
> > it was removed in setuptools for security reasons.
>
> It wasn't security, it was manageability. Egg
Jeff Rush writes:
> I was in a Packaging BoF yesterday and, although not very relevant to the
> packager bootstrap thread, Guido has asked me to post some of the concerns.
We did address many topics on both days, I added the following topics
which were addressed on the Friday BoF only, see
http:/
At 03:57 AM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>Are you open to giving certain others patch view/commit privileges
>to setuptools?
Jim Fulton has such already. I'm open to extending that to others
who have a good grasp of the subtleties involved.
Truthfully, if we can just get 0.6 put to bed, I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 19, 2008, at 3:57 AM, Jeff Rush wrote:
>
> I and others appreciate your call for more patches on various
> topics. However
> a long delay in applying them will discourage contribution. Are you
> open to
> giving certain others patch view/c
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>
> I'm actually happy to hear that there's this much energy available --
> hopefully some of it can be harnessed towards positive solutions.
>
> When I began developing setuptools, I often asked for the input of
> packagers, developers, etc., through the distutils-sig...
At 05:10 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>I was in a Packaging BoF yesterday and, although not very relevant to the
>packager bootstrap thread, Guido has asked me to post some of the concerns.
>
>The BoF drew about 15 people, many of whom were packagers for Red Hat, Ubuntu
>and such. Everyone
I was in a Packaging BoF yesterday and, although not very relevant to the
packager bootstrap thread, Guido has asked me to post some of the concerns.
The BoF drew about 15 people, many of whom were packagers for Red Hat, Ubuntu
and such. Everyone had strong expressions of frustration with the s
10 matches
Mail list logo
