The concurrency discussion is off-topic!
Please take the concurrency discussion to: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-sig -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/ Independent Software developer/SCM consultant, email for more information. O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
Den 12.02.2012 23:21, skrev Mike Meyer:
Please take the concurrency discussion to:
It might have diverged into something off-topic. But it started up as a response to Jesse Noller on improvement of multiprocessing's IPC objects. That is, e.g. being able to send an object with a mp.Lock accross a mp.Queue. That is not off-topic AFAIK. I think it is important with discussion and feedback on how these objects should work. Sturla
Den 12.02.2012 23:21, skrev Mike Meyer:
Please take the concurrency discussion to:
It seems that list has nearly zero traffic. Why post to a list that nobody reads? Sturla
On Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:33:00 +0100 Sturla Molden <sturla@molden.no> wrote: Apologies for the blank response you got.
Because that way, we won't be annoying the people who don't care about concurrency with an off-topic discussion. If you're interested in concurrency in Python, you should be reading that list. Given the amount of discussion here, I was surprised at how quite that list was. I suspect many of those here didn't know about it, and set about to correct that. Most of this discussion should be there, and then when that SIG has thrashed out a proposal for a change, it can be brought back here. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/ Independent Software developer/SCM consultant, email for more information. O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:33:00PM +0100, Sturla Molden wrote:
It's the right place to discuss these things: concurrency-sig: Discussion of concurrency issues in python. and presumably you won't be e-mailing as many people who *aren't* interested in concurrency. Python-ideas is rapidly becoming the *wrong* place for this discussion: Python-ideas: This list is to contain discussion of speculative language ideas for Python for possible inclusion into the language. If an idea gains traction it can then be discussed and honed to the point of becoming a solid proposal to put to either python-dev or python-3000 as appropriate. So, whether or not it was the right place to begin with, could you please move it to concurrency-sig? thanks, --titus (moderator) -- C. Titus Brown, ctb@msu.edu
Its not like there is a huge amount of traffic in python-ideas But if its annoying people ill sign up to concurrency sig How many mailing lists do I need to sign up to to make sure Im not missing something I might be intersted in. Email "Subject" fields, I find, are quite useful
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 13:41:57 +0200 Christopher Reay <christopherreay@gmail.com> wrote:
Its not like there is a huge amount of traffic in python-ideas
Are you kidding? The idiotic "TIOBE -3%" discussion thread is probably in the hundred of answers now. That's for a completely vacuous thread launched 4 days ago by a well-known troll. python-ideas is not a playground for people with an opinion. It's a communication tool for core development. Thanks Antoine.
Hmm. Stimulating people to express what they believe the major hurdles to uptake of use of the language are, discuss their solutions. 100 mails in 4 days is light traffic afaik. But im fairly new to this, so ill bow out. Still, I thought it was itneresting and informative discussion with lots of specific information. Where would you suggest discussion should have taken place? -- Be prepared to have your predictions come true
Hello,
Still, I thought it was itneresting and informative discussion with lots of specific information.
Not really. The subjects discussed there, e.g. the GIL and multithreading, have already been rehashed countless times. Perhaps you may find them interesting if you haven't really followed the mailing-lists in the past.
Where would you suggest discussion should have taken place?
Well, in that case, it should really have been /dev/null :( Regards Antoine.
lol why, then, are people with experience on the lists using this as a space to express themselves?
Hey, Sturla, Mike and other people who clearly know what they are talking about and this ecosystem, why are we using this space for this discussion? Felt all kind of warm and fuzzy and community like to me. On 13 February 2012 15:01, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
-- Be prepared to have your predictions come true
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
Well-known troll is +1 that proposal to write to an empty list sounds like "you're not welcome here with your multiprocessing". I guess you didn't mention that, so the problem probably that you can not handle the list traffic, and read all interesting Python ideas - not speaking about answering to all of them with your opinion. No problem with that either - nobody can. That's why there was proposal about Etherpad, which summaries would be as interesting for Python community as different blog posts from core devs. python-ideas is not a playground for people with an opinion.
It's a communication tool for core development.
Since many of (potential) core devs are not able to cope up with traffic in main lists, I'd propose to look for a better communication tool that at least allows easy selective subscription (like Google Groups) and makes sure interested parties have accessible instrument (for a reference to accessibility read Steve Yegge's rant at https://plus.google.com/112678702228711889851/posts/eVeouesvaVX) to subscribe and participate (search, tree with all mailing lists and one-button subscription). I've heard Pinax guys are rethinking their Tribes/Groups feature - https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/pinax-users/Wze7L2LlwjM- perhaps you should communicate with them.
Thanks
P.S. I am not changing the subject of this thread to stop spawning another "completely vacuous thread". P.P.S. Too bad I can not be at PyCon this year. -- anatoly t.
Den 12.02.2012 23:21, skrev Mike Meyer:
Please take the concurrency discussion to:
It might have diverged into something off-topic. But it started up as a response to Jesse Noller on improvement of multiprocessing's IPC objects. That is, e.g. being able to send an object with a mp.Lock accross a mp.Queue. That is not off-topic AFAIK. I think it is important with discussion and feedback on how these objects should work. Sturla
Den 12.02.2012 23:21, skrev Mike Meyer:
Please take the concurrency discussion to:
It seems that list has nearly zero traffic. Why post to a list that nobody reads? Sturla
On Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:33:00 +0100 Sturla Molden <sturla@molden.no> wrote: Apologies for the blank response you got.
Because that way, we won't be annoying the people who don't care about concurrency with an off-topic discussion. If you're interested in concurrency in Python, you should be reading that list. Given the amount of discussion here, I was surprised at how quite that list was. I suspect many of those here didn't know about it, and set about to correct that. Most of this discussion should be there, and then when that SIG has thrashed out a proposal for a change, it can be brought back here. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/ Independent Software developer/SCM consultant, email for more information. O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:33:00PM +0100, Sturla Molden wrote:
It's the right place to discuss these things: concurrency-sig: Discussion of concurrency issues in python. and presumably you won't be e-mailing as many people who *aren't* interested in concurrency. Python-ideas is rapidly becoming the *wrong* place for this discussion: Python-ideas: This list is to contain discussion of speculative language ideas for Python for possible inclusion into the language. If an idea gains traction it can then be discussed and honed to the point of becoming a solid proposal to put to either python-dev or python-3000 as appropriate. So, whether or not it was the right place to begin with, could you please move it to concurrency-sig? thanks, --titus (moderator) -- C. Titus Brown, ctb@msu.edu
Its not like there is a huge amount of traffic in python-ideas But if its annoying people ill sign up to concurrency sig How many mailing lists do I need to sign up to to make sure Im not missing something I might be intersted in. Email "Subject" fields, I find, are quite useful
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 13:41:57 +0200 Christopher Reay <christopherreay@gmail.com> wrote:
Its not like there is a huge amount of traffic in python-ideas
Are you kidding? The idiotic "TIOBE -3%" discussion thread is probably in the hundred of answers now. That's for a completely vacuous thread launched 4 days ago by a well-known troll. python-ideas is not a playground for people with an opinion. It's a communication tool for core development. Thanks Antoine.
Hmm. Stimulating people to express what they believe the major hurdles to uptake of use of the language are, discuss their solutions. 100 mails in 4 days is light traffic afaik. But im fairly new to this, so ill bow out. Still, I thought it was itneresting and informative discussion with lots of specific information. Where would you suggest discussion should have taken place? -- Be prepared to have your predictions come true
Hello,
Still, I thought it was itneresting and informative discussion with lots of specific information.
Not really. The subjects discussed there, e.g. the GIL and multithreading, have already been rehashed countless times. Perhaps you may find them interesting if you haven't really followed the mailing-lists in the past.
Where would you suggest discussion should have taken place?
Well, in that case, it should really have been /dev/null :( Regards Antoine.
lol why, then, are people with experience on the lists using this as a space to express themselves?
Hey, Sturla, Mike and other people who clearly know what they are talking about and this ecosystem, why are we using this space for this discussion? Felt all kind of warm and fuzzy and community like to me. On 13 February 2012 15:01, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
-- Be prepared to have your predictions come true
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
Well-known troll is +1 that proposal to write to an empty list sounds like "you're not welcome here with your multiprocessing". I guess you didn't mention that, so the problem probably that you can not handle the list traffic, and read all interesting Python ideas - not speaking about answering to all of them with your opinion. No problem with that either - nobody can. That's why there was proposal about Etherpad, which summaries would be as interesting for Python community as different blog posts from core devs. python-ideas is not a playground for people with an opinion.
It's a communication tool for core development.
Since many of (potential) core devs are not able to cope up with traffic in main lists, I'd propose to look for a better communication tool that at least allows easy selective subscription (like Google Groups) and makes sure interested parties have accessible instrument (for a reference to accessibility read Steve Yegge's rant at https://plus.google.com/112678702228711889851/posts/eVeouesvaVX) to subscribe and participate (search, tree with all mailing lists and one-button subscription). I've heard Pinax guys are rethinking their Tribes/Groups feature - https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/pinax-users/Wze7L2LlwjM- perhaps you should communicate with them.
Thanks
P.S. I am not changing the subject of this thread to stop spawning another "completely vacuous thread". P.P.S. Too bad I can not be at PyCon this year. -- anatoly t.
participants (9)
-
anatoly techtonik -
Antoine Pitrou -
C. Titus Brown -
Christopher Reay -
Jesse Noller -
Mark Lawrence -
Matt Joiner -
Mike Meyer -
Sturla Molden