-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 2, 2009, at 4:48 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Fine with me (although next Friday (Feb 6) would work slightly
better)
Feb 6 won't work for me. Would the 20th be better for you Martin?
No, they are both busy days - Feb 13 is then slightly
>> Fine with me (although next Friday (Feb 6) would work slightly better)
>
> Feb 6 won't work for me. Would the 20th be better for you Martin?
No, they are both busy days - Feb 13 is then slightly better than Feb
20. I have about an hour in the morning (around 8:00 UTC), and then
after 15:00 U
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 31, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
How about Friday February 13?
Fine with me (although next Friday (Feb 6) would work slightly better)
Feb 6 won't work for me. Would the 20th be better for you Martin?
Barry
-BEGIN PGP S
> How about Friday February 13?
Fine with me (although next Friday (Feb 6) would work slightly better)
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 30, 2009, at 3:07 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Brett Cannon
wrote:
Great! Then should we start planning for 3.0.1 in terms of release
dates and what to have in the release so we can get this out the door
qu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 30, 2009, at 1:56 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 08:03, Barry Warsaw wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:53 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
1. Barry, who is the release manager for 3.0.1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 30, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Barry Warsaw
wrote:
To clarify: cruft that should have been removed 3.0 is fine to
remove for
3.0.1, for some definition of "should have been".
Just to doubl
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:07, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> Great! Then should we start planning for 3.0.1 in terms of release
>> dates and what to have in the release so we can get this out the door
>> quickly?
>
> I think considering there's
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Great! Then should we start planning for 3.0.1 in terms of release
> dates and what to have in the release so we can get this out the door
> quickly?
I think considering there's only two release blockers we should plan
for about a week or two
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 08:03, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:53 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>
>>> 1. Barry, who is the release manager for 3.0.1, does not like the idea
>>> of the cruft that is being proposed removed from 3.0.1.
>>
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> To clarify: cruft that should have been removed 3.0 is fine to remove for
> 3.0.1, for some definition of "should have been".
Just to double check, can I take this as a green light to continue
with the cmp removal (http://bugs.python.org/issu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:53 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
1. Barry, who is the release manager for 3.0.1, does not like the
idea
of the cruft that is being proposed removed from 3.0.1.
I don't think he actually said that (in fact, I think he said the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 29, 2009, at 10:59 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
1. Barry, who is the release manager for 3.0.1, does not like the idea
of the cruft that is being proposed removed from 3.0.1. Personally I
say we continue to peer pressure him as I think a new major
> 1. Barry, who is the release manager for 3.0.1, does not like the idea
> of the cruft that is being proposed removed from 3.0.1.
I don't think he actually said that (in fact, I think he said the
opposite). It would be good if he clarified, though.
Regards,
Martin
___
Brett Cannon wrote:
This is my attempt to summarize what everyone has been saying so we
can get this resolved.
From what I can tell, most people like the idea of doing a 3.0.1
release ASAP (like "in a week or so" fast) with the stuff that should
have been removed from 3.0.0 in the first place
15 matches
Mail list logo
