a Mercurial "super client" http://blog.red-bean.com/sussman/?p=116
Figured I would link to this for the people doing the HG investigation
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 25, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Jared Grubb wrote:
Regardless of the outcome, those that want to use SVN can use SVN,
and those that want to use "chosen DVCS" can use that. In the end,
which is the more "lossy" repository? It seems like if the chan
> Unfortunately I've heard we shouldn't upgrade to svn 1.5 until more
> Linux distributions ship with it by default.
We *could* upgrade to subversion 1.5 on the server (if only Debian
would get their ... together and release the version they promised
for last September).
The question is then whet
On Jan 26, 2009, at 5:18 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Guido van Rossum
wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Giovanni Bajo
wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:31:55 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Paul Hummer >
wrote:
At a pre
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:31:55 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Paul Hummer
>>> wrote:
At a previous employer, we had this same discussion
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:31:55 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Paul Hummer
>> wrote:
>>> At a previous employer, we had this same discussion about switching to
>>> a DVCS, and the time and cost required to
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:31:55 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Paul Hummer
> wrote:
>> At a previous employer, we had this same discussion about switching to
>> a DVCS, and the time and cost required to learn the new tool. We
>> switched to bzr, and while there we
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Paul Hummer wrote:
> At a previous employer, we had this same discussion about switching to a DVCS,
> and the time and cost required to learn the new tool. We switched to bzr, and
> while there were days where someone got lost in the DVCS, the overall
> advantages
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:44:15 +0900, David Cournapeau
wrote:
> >
> > Again, I don't take the cost of learning a new tool lightly, but
> > please let's call that cost by its name, and not bring "distributed"
> > into it.
>
> I can only strongly agree on this point - most people asserting that
> DV
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
> Again, I don't take the cost of learning a new tool lightly, but
> please let's call that cost by its name, and not bring "distributed"
> into it.
I can only strongly agree on this point - most people asserting that
DVCS are much mo
Michael Foord writes:
> > If I can't choose a clear winner I am going to look into what it take
> > to run directly on top of svn to avoid the extra step for committers.
> Well, that sounds like an ideal situation to end up in. Is there a
> downside other than the work it creates for you?
I
"Martin v. Löwis" writes:
> So a conversion to a DVCS would only benefit those committers who
> see a benefit in using a DVCS (*) (and would put a burden on those
> committers who see a DVCS as a burden).
That's false. Especially with bzr, they would see improved log
formats by default, and w
Regardless of the outcome, those that want to use SVN can use SVN, and
those that want to use "chosen DVCS" can use that. In the end, which
is the more "lossy" repository? It seems like if the change is
transparent to everyone who is using it, then the only thing that we
care about is that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 25, 2009, at 1:37 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
(*) I'm probably missing something, but ISTM that committers can
already
use the DVCS - they only need to create a patch just before
committing.
This, of course, is somewhat more complicated tha
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 13:03, Michael Foord wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:37, "Martin v. Löwis"
>> wrote:
>>
There's a possible third way. I've heard (though haven't investigated)
that some people are working on supporting the svn wire protocol in
Brett Cannon wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:37, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
There's a possible third way. I've heard (though haven't investigated)
that some people are working on supporting the svn wire protocol in the
bzr server. This would mean that anybody who's still comfortable with
s
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:37, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> There's a possible third way. I've heard (though haven't investigated)
>> that some people are working on supporting the svn wire protocol in the
>> bzr server. This would mean that anybody who's still comfortable with
>> svn and feels n
Martin v. Löwis v.loewis.de> writes:
> In
> essence, committers wanting to use a DVCS can do so today, by acting
> as if they were non-committers, and only using svn for actual changes
> to the master repository.
Indeed. It is how I work.
Regards
Antoine.
_
> There's a possible third way. I've heard (though haven't investigated)
> that some people are working on supporting the svn wire protocol in the
> bzr server. This would mean that anybody who's still comfortable with
> svn and feels no need to change their current habits can continue to
> work
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 24, 2009, at 7:48 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
As part of my impressions I plan to also look at usage on top of svn
as a viable alternative if no clear winner comes about. That way if
they work well directly on top of svn we can write up very clea
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 16:44, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 15:34, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> Second, I think it would be good to explicitly mention the option of
> deferring this PEP. Based on previous discussion, it sounds like there
> are a
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 15:34, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
Second, I think it would be good to explicitly mention the option of
deferring this PEP. Based on previous discussion, it sounds like there
are a fair number of people who think that there is a DVCS in Py
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 15:34, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>> Second, I think it would be good to explicitly mention the option of
>>> deferring this PEP. Based on previous discussion, it sounds like there
>>> are a fair number of people who think that there is a DVCS in Python's
>>> future, but no
>> Second, I think it would be good to explicitly mention the option of
>> deferring this PEP. Based on previous discussion, it sounds like there
>> are a fair number of people who think that there is a DVCS in Python's
>> future, but not now (where "now" means over the next couple of years).
>
>
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 07:25, Aahz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>> I have now converted PEP 374
>> (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0374/) from Google Docs to reST
>> and checked it in.
>
> First of all, thanks for providing PEP number, URL, and short title;
> that mak
Aahz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> I have now converted PEP 374
>> (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0374/) from Google Docs to reST
>> and checked it in.
>
> First of all, thanks for providing PEP number, URL, and short title;
> that makes it much easier to keep track o
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> I have now converted PEP 374
> (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0374/) from Google Docs to reST
> and checked it in.
First of all, thanks for providing PEP number, URL, and short title;
that makes it much easier to keep track of the discussion on l
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:11, Steven Bethard
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:06 PM, "Martin v. Löwis"
>> wrote:
import random
print(random.choice('svn', 'bzr', 'hg', 'git'))
>>> Nice! So it's bzr, as my machine just told me (after adding
>>> the s
Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 13:39, Paul Moore wrote:
I'm not sure I'm
comfortable with sitting back and waiting to quite that extent (I'm
*already* biting my tongue over some of Brett's comments with which I
strongly disagree), but I'd rather not have the PEP dissolve in a
flam
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 13:39, Paul Moore wrote:
> 2009/1/23 "Martin v. Löwis" :
>>> Brett mentioned in his email that he wasn't ready to make a decision yet, I
>>> think? I also think that the PEP could still use some modifications from
>>> people
>>> who have more experience with the DVCSs.
>>
2009/1/23 "Martin v. Löwis" :
>> Brett mentioned in his email that he wasn't ready to make a decision yet, I
>> think? I also think that the PEP could still use some modifications from
>> people
>> who have more experience with the DVCSs.
>
> My question really was whether it is already ready for
> Brett mentioned in his email that he wasn't ready to make a decision yet, I
> think? I also think that the PEP could still use some modifications from
> people
> who have more experience with the DVCSs.
My question really was whether it is already ready for the wider
audience up for discussion
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:11, Steven Bethard wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:06 PM, "Martin v. Löwis"
> wrote:
>>> import random
>>> print(random.choice('svn', 'bzr', 'hg', 'git'))
>>
>> Nice! So it's bzr, as my machine just told me (after adding
>> the square brackets).
>
> Wow, th
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:06 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> import random
>> print(random.choice('svn', 'bzr', 'hg', 'git'))
>
> Nice! So it's bzr, as my machine just told me (after adding
> the square brackets).
Wow, that decision was a lot easier than I thought it would be. ;-)
Steve
> import random
> print(random.choice('svn', 'bzr', 'hg', 'git'))
Nice! So it's bzr, as my machine just told me (after adding
the square brackets).
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 07:30, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brett, thanks for putting this PEP together!
>
Yep. Just make sure I don't do something like this for a LONG time.
Apparently I didn't learn my lesson after the issue tracker migration.
> On
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 03:05, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Brett Cannon python.org> writes:
>>
>> I have now converted PEP 374
>> (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0374/) from Google Docs to reST
>> and checked it in. I am not going to paste it into an email as it is
>> nearly 1500 lines in reST fo
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 00:39, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> And I would like to thank my co-authors for their time and effort thus
>> far in filling in the PEP on behalf of their favorite DVCS. Everyone
>> has put in a lot of time already with I am sure more time in the
>> future.
>
> So what will
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brett, thanks for putting this PEP together!
On Jan 23, 2009, at 3:39 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Somebody will have to make a decision. Ultimately, Guido will have to
approve the PEP, but it might be that he refuses to make a choice of
specific DVC
Brett Cannon python.org> writes:
>
> I have now converted PEP 374
> (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0374/) from Google Docs to reST
> and checked it in. I am not going to paste it into an email as it is
> nearly 1500 lines in reST form.
It seems the ">>" token is mangled into a French closin
Martin v. Löwis v.loewis.de> writes:
> Somebody will have to make a decision. Ultimately, Guido will have to
> approve the PEP, but it might be that he refuses to make a choice of
> specific DVCS. Traditionally, it is the PEP author who makes all
> choices (considering suggestions from the communi
> And I would like to thank my co-authors for their time and effort thus
> far in filling in the PEP on behalf of their favorite DVCS. Everyone
> has put in a lot of time already with I am sure more time in the
> future.
So what will happen next? ISTM that the PEP is not complete, since it
doesn't
I have now converted PEP 374
(http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0374/) from Google Docs to reST
and checked it in. I am not going to paste it into an email as it is
nearly 1500 lines in reST form.
Because there are four authors handling corrections it is a little
different than normal on who you
43 matches
Mail list logo
