commit rights for Richard Oudkerk (sbt)
Hi,
Richard (sbt) has been contributing for quite some time now, as can be seen from (part of) its contributions below:
"""
Issue #4892: multiprocessing Connections can now be transferred over multiprocessing Connections. Patch by Richard Oudkerk (sbt).
Issue #11750: The Windows API functions scattered in the _subprocess and _multiprocessing.win32 modules now live in a single module "_winapi". Patch by sbt.
Issue #14087: multiprocessing: add Condition.wait_for(). Patch by sbt.
Issue #14522: Avoid duplicating socket handles in multiprocessing.connection. Patch by sbt.
Issue #14300: Under Windows, sockets created using socket.dup() now allow overlapped I/O. Patch by sbt.
Issue #14335: multiprocessing's custom Pickler subclass now inherits from the C-accelerated implementation. Patch by sbt.
Issue #12328: Fix multiprocessing's use of overlapped I/O on Windows. Also, add a multiprocessing.connection.wait(rlist, timeout=None) function for polling multiple objects at once. Patch by sbt.
Issue #13322: Fix BufferedWriter.write() to ensure that BlockingIOError is raised when the wrapped raw file is non-blocking and the write would block. Previous code assumed that the raw write() would raise BlockingIOError, but RawIOBase.write() is defined to returned None when the call would block. Patch by sbt. """
He writes good code, has good ideas, is reactive to comments and reviews, and he's actually the original multiprocessing author (and he's one of the few contributors competent under both Unix and Windows).
Therefore, I think it would definitely make sense to give him commit rights.
What do you think?
Cheers,
cf
On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Charles-François Natali wrote:
Hi,
Richard (sbt) has been contributing for quite some time now, as can be seen from (part of) its contributions below:
[snip]
He writes good code, has good ideas, is reactive to comments and reviews, and he's actually the original multiprocessing author (and he's one of the few contributors competent under both Unix and Windows).
Therefore, I think it would definitely make sense to give him commit rights.
What do you think?
Cheers,
cf
Uh, Wow. Yes. He should have commit rights - he was granted them when the multiprocessing pep was approved, but then vanished for several years (myself and others tried getting a hold of him). Lack of any contributor agreement or response from him is actually why the header files for multiprocessing including the specific license due to lack of contributor agreement from him.
He should have commit rights: In fact I'd love to talk to him offline about where he went off to! I assumed he was gone-gone!
Jesse
Le mercredi 25 avril 2012 à 15:08 -0400, Jesse Noller a écrit :
On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Charles-François Natali wrote:
Hi,
Richard (sbt) has been contributing for quite some time now, as can be seen from (part of) its contributions below:
[snip]
He writes good code, has good ideas, is reactive to comments and reviews, and he's actually the original multiprocessing author (and he's one of the few contributors competent under both Unix and Windows).
Therefore, I think it would definitely make sense to give him commit rights.
What do you think?
Cheers,
cf
Uh, Wow. Yes. He should have commit rights - he was granted them when the multiprocessing pep was approved, but then vanished for several years (myself and others tried getting a hold of him).
Actually, I don't see his name in the SSH keys history, so apparently he wasn't given commit rights at the time.
He should have commit rights: In fact I'd love to talk to him offline about where he went off to! I assumed he was gone-gone!
Agreed with Jesse and Charles-François.
Regards
Antoine.
Uh, Wow. Yes. He should have commit rights - he was granted them when the multiprocessing pep was approved, but then vanished for several years (myself and others tried getting a hold of him).
Actually, I don't see his name in the SSH keys history, so apparently he wasn't given commit rights at the time.
You wouldn't; he "disappeared" before that happened. I am *really* happy to see him alive and active!
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012, at 03:08 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Charles-François Natali wrote:
Hi,
Richard (sbt) has been contributing for quite some time now, as can be seen from (part of) its contributions below:
[snip]
He writes good code, has good ideas, is reactive to comments and reviews, and he's actually the original multiprocessing author (and he's one of the few contributors competent under both Unix and Windows).
Therefore, I think it would definitely make sense to give him commit rights.
What do you think?
Cheers,
cf
Uh, Wow. Yes. He should have commit rights - he was granted them when the multiprocessing pep was approved, but then vanished for several years (myself and others tried getting a hold of him). Lack of any contributor agreement or response from him is actually why the header files for multiprocessing including the specific license due to lack of contributor agreement from him.
He should have commit rights: In fact I'd love to talk to him offline about where he went off to! I assumed he was gone-gone!
Jesse
Guido mentioned him at the 2011 Language Summit as a vanished contributor that we'd really like to get an agreement from.
+1
-- KBK
Guido mentioned him at the 2011 Language Summit as a vanished contributor that we'd really like to get an agreement from.
+1
-- KBK
Interesting note: We supposedly have a contributor agreement on file for him now:
Contributor Form Received Yes on: 2012-02-26.05:00:00
I'll follow up offline to confirm
jesse
participants (4)
-
Antoine Pitrou -
Charles-François Natali -
Jesse Noller -
Kurt B. Kaiser