patch for review: __import__ documentation
Here is another patch for review: http://bugs.python.org/issue8370 This is a trivial fix to the 2.6 and 2.7 documentation. Thanks, --Chris
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 20:54, Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek@gmail.com>wrote:
Here is another patch for review:
http://bugs.python.org/issue8370
This is a trivial fix to the 2.6 and 2.7 documentation.
There is no need to email python-dev about individual patches just to get them looked at. There is a mailing list that we all subscribe to that send an email on all new issues and another one on every change to any issue. You should only email python-dev if a patch you wrote has been sitting around for a very long time and is not being actively looked at or you think it should hold up a release. -Brett
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
There is no need to email python-dev about individual patches just to get them looked at. There is a mailing list that we all subscribe to that send an email on all new issues and another one on every change to any issue. You should only email python-dev if a patch you wrote has been sitting around for a very long time and is not being actively looked at or you think it should hold up a release.
Sorry, I had received somewhat different guidance on tracker-discuss: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/tracker-discuss/2010-April/002482.html http://mail.python.org/pipermail/tracker-discuss/2010-April/002483.html http://mail.python.org/pipermail/tracker-discuss/2010-April/002484.html Otherwise, I would not have bothered to e-mail the list. I will be more conservative about posting to python-dev in the future. --Chris
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 13:41, Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek@gmail.com>wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
There is no need to email python-dev about individual patches just to get them looked at. There is a mailing list that we all subscribe to that send an email on all new issues and another one on every change to any issue. You should only email python-dev if a patch you wrote has been sitting around for a very long time and is not being actively looked at or you think it should hold up a release.
Sorry, I had received somewhat different guidance on tracker-discuss:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/tracker-discuss/2010-April/002482.html http://mail.python.org/pipermail/tracker-discuss/2010-April/002483.html http://mail.python.org/pipermail/tracker-discuss/2010-April/002484.html
Otherwise, I would not have bothered to e-mail the list.
I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that required discussion, not simply issues that had a patch ready to go. -Brett
On Apr 14, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that required discussion, not simply issues that had a patch ready to go.
I'm curious - if one isn't supposed to ping the mailing list every time, how does one ask the tracker "please show me all the issues which have a patch ready to go that hasn't been reviewed / responded to / rejected or applied"? It seems like patches sometimes linger for quite a while and often their workflow-state is highly unclear (to me, at least).
On Apr 14, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that required discussion, not simply issues that had a patch ready to go.
Ach. I hit 'send' too soon. I also wanted to say: it seemed quite clear to me that Martin specifically meant "simply issues that had a patch ready to go". Quoting him exactly:
Please understand that setting the state of an issue to "review" may *not* be the best way to trigger a review - it may be more effective to post to python-dev if you truly believe that the patch can be committed as-is. It seems that perhaps the core developers have slightly different opinions about this? :)
Yes, we have different opinions. My personal take is to wait a week before you email python-dev if there has been no activity. That is enough time for people interested in the patch to get to it as we all have different schedules. Any faster and it feels like noise on the list to me. Brett (from his phone) On Apr 14, 2010 11:28 PM, "Glyph Lefkowitz" <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote: On Apr 14, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that required discussion, not sim... Ach. I hit 'send' too soon. I also wanted to say: it seemed quite clear to me that Martin specifically meant "simply issues that had a patch ready to go". Quoting him exactly:
Please understand that setting the state of an issue to "review" may *not* be the best way to trigger a review - it may be more effective to post to python-dev if you truly believe that the patch can be committed as-is. It seems that perhaps the core developers have slightly different opinions about this? :)
Yes, we have different opinions. My personal take is to wait a week before you email python-dev if there has been no activity. That is enough time for people interested in the patch to get to it as we all have different schedules. Any faster and it feels like noise on the list to me. Brett (from his phone) On Apr 14, 2010 11:28 PM, "Glyph Lefkowitz" <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote: On Apr 14, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that required discussion, not sim...
Ach. I hit 'send' too soon. I also wanted to say: it seemed quite clear to me that Martin specifically meant "simply issues that had a patch ready to go". Quoting him exactly: Please understand that setting the state of an issue to "review" may *not* be the best way to trigger a review - it may be more effective to post to python-dev if you truly believe that the patch can be committed as-is. It seems that perhaps the core developers have slightly different opinions about this? :)
Yes, we have different opinions. My personal take is to wait a week before you email python-dev if there has been no activity. That is enough time for people interested in the patch to get to it as we all have different schedules. Any faster and it feels like noise on the list to me. Brett (from his phone) On Apr 14, 2010 11:28 PM, "Glyph Lefkowitz" <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote: On Apr 14, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that required discussion, not sim...
Ach. I hit 'send' too soon. I also wanted to say: it seemed quite clear to me that Martin specifically meant "simply issues that had a patch ready to go". Quoting him exactly: Please understand that setting the state of an issue to "review" may *not* be the best way to trigger a review - it may be more effective to post to python-dev if you truly believe that the patch can be committed as-is. It seems that perhaps the core developers have slightly different opinions about this? :)
I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that required discussion, not simply issues that had a patch ready to go.
I actually think it is perfectly fine to point out that specific issues are need committer action on this list. This is what the list is there for. Waiting some time to see whether some developer reacts is certainly a good idea: notice, however, that Chris had already waited a few days. Regards, Martin
participants (4)
-
"Martin v. Löwis" -
Brett Cannon -
Chris Jerdonek -
Glyph Lefkowitz