v.loewis.de> writes:
> Now that we do have the PEP, I think that should be done properly.
> I thought you offered to rewrite it. Formally, I could accept the
> PEP being withdrawn, and the feature integrated anyway, but I still
> consider that bad style.
>
> So: I can offer to rewrite the PEP t
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 22:48, wrote:
> Now that we do have the PEP, I think that should be done properly.
> I thought you offered to rewrite it.
There are definitely areas that I would like to work on, especially
pulling implementation details out and replacing with, as you say,
end-user prose.
Zitat von Brian Curtin :
After talking with Martin and several others during the language
summit and elsewhere around PyCon, PEP 397 should be accepted. I don't
remember who, but some suggested it should just be a regular old
feature instead of going through the PEP process. So...does this even
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Brian Curtin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 17:45, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>> 2012/3/29 Brian Curtin :
>>> After talking with Martin and several others during the language
>>> summit and elsewhere around PyCon, PEP 397 should be accepted. I don't
>>> remember w
Brian Curtin python.org> writes:
> Vinay - is the code you have on bitbucket ready to roll into CPython,
> thus into the installer?
I believe the main C launcher code is ready to roll into CPython. However, the
standalone installer I provide uses WiX rather than msilib, and includes
additional e
2012/3/29 Brian Curtin :
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 17:45, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>> 2012/3/29 Brian Curtin :
>>> After talking with Martin and several others during the language
>>> summit and elsewhere around PyCon, PEP 397 should be accepted. I don't
>>> remember who, but some suggested it sho
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 18:08, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> All it needs is official acceptance now, and integration into the release,
> no?
If it wasn't clear, this is what I said in the first post.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://
On 3/29/2012 3:50 PM, Brian Curtin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 17:45, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2012/3/29 Brian Curtin:
>> After talking with Martin and several others during the language
>> summit and elsewhere around PyCon, PEP 397 should be accepted. I don't
>> remember who, but som
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 17:45, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2012/3/29 Brian Curtin :
>> After talking with Martin and several others during the language
>> summit and elsewhere around PyCon, PEP 397 should be accepted. I don't
>> remember who, but some suggested it should just be a regular old
>> fe
2012/3/29 Brian Curtin :
> After talking with Martin and several others during the language
> summit and elsewhere around PyCon, PEP 397 should be accepted. I don't
> remember who, but some suggested it should just be a regular old
> feature instead of going through the PEP process. So...does this
After talking with Martin and several others during the language
summit and elsewhere around PyCon, PEP 397 should be accepted. I don't
remember who, but some suggested it should just be a regular old
feature instead of going through the PEP process. So...does this even
need to continue the PEP pro
11 matches
Mail list logo