On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Mark Dickinson wrote:
>> Is the cron job that's supposed to update the bzr repository still
>> running?
> I think I have this fixed now. The branch updater is running on dinsdale
> now, but I'm currently staggerin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 25, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Barry Warsaw
wrote:
This is now done. Please let me know if you have any problems with
the
mirrors.
Is the cron job that's supposed to update the bzr reposit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 25, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Barry Warsaw
wrote:
This is now done. Please let me know if you have any problems with
the
mirrors.
Is the cron job that's supposed to update the bzr reposit
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> This is now done. Please let me know if you have any problems with the
> mirrors.
Is the cron job that's supposed to update the bzr repository still running?
I'm getting 'No revisions to pull' when I do 'bzr pull' for the py3k branch:
Macin
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I've just upgraded the Bazaar mirrors on code.python.org to use bzr
1.12. We now have the opportunity to upgrade the repository format
for better performance. Because of the bzr-svn requirement, we need a
"rich root" format. Upgrading to 1.9-rich-root could buy us some
s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 20, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I've just upgraded the Bazaar mirrors on code.python.org to use bzr
1.12. We now have the opportunity to upgrade the repository format
for better performance. Because of the bzr-svn requirement,
Michael Foord wrote:
> Steve Holden wrote:
>> Steven Bethard wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>
PS Just for my own information, am I correct in thinking that it is
*only* Bazaar in the (D)VCS world that has this problem, to any real
extent? I
Steve Holden wrote:
Steven Bethard wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
PS Just for my own information, am I correct in thinking that it is
*only* Bazaar in the (D)VCS world that has this problem, to any real
extent? I know old Mercurial clients can interact with n
> This has been true for a number of cases over the years: whether the
> "repostiory format", or the wire protocol, sometimes changes which
> materially *improve* the user's experience may require upgrading the
> client on the user's machine. In the case of SVN, upgrading to 1.5 gets
> vastly be
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> "Martin v. Löwis" writes:
> > sjt sez:
>
> > > I didn't say "from source", I said "from a VCS checkout". If using a
> > > *specific* recent official release of a core tool is bureaucratically
> > > infeasible, it would IMO be very
Steven Bethard wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>> PS Just for my own information, am I correct in thinking that it is
>> *only* Bazaar in the (D)VCS world that has this problem, to any real
>> extent? I know old Mercurial clients can interact with newer servers
>> (ie,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Moore wrote:
> 2009/2/21 Barry Warsaw :
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>
>>> PS Just for my own information, am I correct in thinking that it is
>>> *only* Bazaar in the (D
2009/2/21 Barry Warsaw :
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Feb 21, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
>> PS Just for my own information, am I correct in thinking that it is
>> *only* Bazaar in the (D)VCS world that has this problem, to any real
>> extent? I know old Mercur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 21, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
PS Just for my own information, am I correct in thinking that it is
*only* Bazaar in the (D)VCS world that has this problem, to any real
extent? I know old Mercurial clients can interact with newer serv
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> PS Just for my own information, am I correct in thinking that it is
> *only* Bazaar in the (D)VCS world that has this problem, to any real
> extent? I know old Mercurial clients can interact with newer servers
> (ie, the wire protocol hasn't cha
2009/2/21 "Martin v. Löwis" :
>> Wouldn't such hypothetical core Python developers be able to build and
>> run their own local copy of bzr, using that self-compiled Python?
>
> It has been hypothetical for a while, but it never was about core
> developers.
Given that it *is* all hypothetical by no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 21, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
-On [20090221 21:30], Barry Warsaw (ba...@python.org) wrote:
I think no matter what DVCS gets chosen
Isn't that getting ahead of the game? I thought that the choice
whether or
n
-On [20090221 21:30], Barry Warsaw (ba...@python.org) wrote:
>I think no matter what DVCS gets chosen
Isn't that getting ahead of the game? I thought that the choice whether or
not a DVCS gets chosen is part of that PEP?
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン
http
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 21, 2009, at 4:57 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
There is no problem with people building their own versions of Python,
though - they do so in their home directories, and OS security
mechanisms prevent them from doing harm to other users.
As sh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 21, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Besides, if Barry makes this experiment *now* and enough people speak
up that it will make it difficult for them to contribute to Python,
the Bazaar proponents can revert to an older version of
Stephen J. Turnbull xemacs.org> writes:
> >
> > Whether it is depends on when a DVCS gets selected. If it gets selected
> > after lenny+1 has been released, I see no problem with requiring version
> > 1.12 (or whatever lenny+1 will then ship with).
>
> I really hope we won't have to wait tha
> I'm *not* ignoring them; I'm stating a strong belief that the great
> majority of them will not be adversely affected by this change. Since
> almost by definition they're not likely to speak up very much, I'm
> happy to hear arguments from a qualified observer (such as yourself)
> on their behal
"Martin v. Löwis" writes:
> so ignoring the primary target group of the setup when discussing
> changes to is is, well, counter-productive.
I'm *not* ignoring them; I'm stating a strong belief that the great
majority of them will not be adversely affected by this change. Since
almost by defini
> Wouldn't such hypothetical core Python developers be able to build and
> run their own local copy of bzr, using that self-compiled Python?
It has been hypothetical for a while, but it never was about core
developers.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev ma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> I didn't say "from source", I said "from a VCS checkout". If using a
>> *specific* recent official release of a core tool is bureaucratically
>> infeasible, it would IMO be very unusual if you're allowed to checkout
>> and bu
> You're ignoring the second paragraph quoted above. I'm *not* denying
> that such environments are common. The question is "Do developers
> *restricted to such environments* really have an impact on Python
> development to outweigh the real cost of standardizing on an older
> implementation of B
2009/2/21 Stephen J. Turnbull :
> Besides, if Barry makes this experiment *now* and enough people speak
> up that it will make it difficult for them to contribute to Python,
> the Bazaar proponents can revert to an older version of Bazaar before
> a final decision is made.
In addition, I think it'
"Martin v. Löwis" writes:
> sjt sez:
> > I didn't say "from source", I said "from a VCS checkout". If using a
> > *specific* recent official release of a core tool is bureaucratically
> > infeasible, it would IMO be very unusual if you're allowed to checkout
> > and build arbitrary versions
> I didn't say "from source", I said "from a VCS checkout". If using a
> *specific* recent official release of a core tool is bureaucratically
> infeasible, it would IMO be very unusual if you're allowed to checkout
> and build arbitrary versions of Python, rather than using a version
> provided b
David Cournapeau writes:
> > Er, what are people without access to PPAs doing building Python from
> > a VCS checkout?
>
> I don't see the link between access to PPA and building Python from
> sources.
I didn't say "from source", I said "from a VCS checkout". If using a
*specific* recent o
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> David Cournapeau writes:
> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> > > In both those cases, you can use the PPA:
>
> > Please note that for many people in a corporate/university
> > environment, this is not an op
David Cournapeau writes:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > In both those cases, you can use the PPA:
> Please note that for many people in a corporate/university
> environment, this is not an option. Granted, you can install it by
> yourself at this point,
Er, what
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Adam Olsen reminds me that bzr 1.9 won't be supported by default in Ubuntu
> until Jaunty in April and Thomas reminds me that Debian still just has 1.5.
>
> In both those cases, you can use the PPA:
>
> https://launchpad.net/~bzr/+archive/ppa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 20, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I've just upgraded the Bazaar mirrors on code.python.org to use bzr
1.12. We now have the opportunity to upgrade the repository format
for better performance. Because of the bzr-svn requirement,
34 matches
Mail list logo
