From gstein@microsoft.com Mon Dec 2 19:19:58 1996 From: gstein@microsoft.com (Greg Stein) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 11:19:58 -0800 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: Would something like a free-text searching engine fall into this SIG? People have rumbled about having that for about a year now... -g -- Greg Stein, Microsoft Corporation execfile("disclaimer.py") >---------- >From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com[SMTP:friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com] >Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 1996 5:55 AM >To: meta-sig@python.org; bwarsaw@CNRI.Reston.Va.US >Cc: kpyee@aw.sgi.com >Subject: Re: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG > > >Woops. I guess I stepped in it since I just posted the New Regex module >spark to comp.lang.python. I'll start working up an info document... >... phunie no one's replied to it yet :-| > >================= >META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists > >send messages to: meta-sig@python.org >administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org >================= > ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com Mon Dec 2 19:45:26 1996 From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com (Robin Friedrich) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 13:45:26 -0600 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: <199612021945.NAA12261@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> |> From: Greg Stein |> Would something like a free-text searching engine fall into this SIG? |> People have rumbled about having that for about a year now... |> |> -g Yes, my vote would be affirmative. (do i sound official or what!) On the Text-SIG page which should be up on python.org soon I mention that a raft of useful tools could be collected by such a sig to aid folks (newbies or oldbies) with text processing needs. This is somewhat (but not far) outside the regex rework. Other things I see folded into a collection include report formatting tools, optimized string concatenation, maybe interpolation tools, fuzzy match searches, etc. -Robin Friedrich ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From kpyee@aw.sgi.com Tue Dec 3 02:58:03 1996 From: kpyee@aw.sgi.com (Ka-Ping Yee) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 11:58:03 +0900 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG References: <199612021945.NAA12261@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> Message-ID: <32A3973B.4487@aw.sgi.com> Robin Friedrich wrote: > > On the Text-SIG page which should be up on python.org soon I mention > that a raft of useful tools could be collected by such a sig to aid > folks (newbies or oldbies) with text processing needs. This is > somewhat (but not far) outside the regex rework. Other things I see > folded into a collection include report formatting tools, optimized > string concatenation, maybe interpolation tools, fuzzy match searches, > etc. All sound good. Boy, we have a big wishlist on our hands... :) Ping Developer, Alias|Wavefront Inc. (Tokyo) http://www.lfw.org/math/ brings math to the Web as easy as ?pi? ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From Barry A. Warsaw" Message-ID: <199612031621.LAA13741@anthem.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> >>>>> "GS" == Greg Stein writes: GS> Would something like a free-text searching engine fall into GS> this SIG? People have rumbled about having that for about a GS> year now... My vote would be no. I'm all for starting an IR-SIG or some such at a later date, but I think this sig should concentrate on improving the language's intrinsic string manipulation features. I think it's primary goal should be a new regular expression module with secondary issues such as string interpolation open for discussion. I think those are going to be big and tough enough, but with large potential of payoff. Keeping the sig's mission as focussed as possible increases the chances of it's success. I think that's the model we've come to favor with the SIGs. Given this view, maybe TEXT-SIG isn't the best name for it. What about STRING-SIG or REGEX-SIG? -Barry ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From gstein@microsoft.com Wed Dec 4 04:06:05 1996 From: gstein@microsoft.com (Greg Stein) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 20:06:05 -0800 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: >---------- >From: Barry A. Warsaw[SMTP:bwarsaw@anthem.cnri.reston.va.us] >Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 1996 8:21 AM >To: Greg Stein >Cc: 'meta-sig@python.org'; 'friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com'; >'kpyee@aw.sgi.com' >Subject: RE: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG >My vote would be no. I'm all for starting an IR-SIG or some such at a >later date, but I think this sig should concentrate on improving the >language's intrinsic string manipulation features. I think it's >primary goal should be a new regular expression module with secondary >issues such as string interpolation open for discussion. I think >those are going to be big and tough enough, but with large potential >of payoff. > >Keeping the sig's mission as focussed as possible increases the >chances of it's success. I think that's the model we've come to favor >with the SIGs. > >Given this view, maybe TEXT-SIG isn't the best name for it. What >about STRING-SIG or REGEX-SIG? No problem with me... if that's the focus, then I'd call it string-sig. I think the easiest way to determine what the focus actually is, is to ask the people who are planning to be involved over the next 3 months, "What do you want to contribute?" (talk is cheap :-). If the contributors never say free-text search... out it goes! That should keep the sig tightly focused and should keep it matched up with what people will actually be doing. -g -- Greg Stein, Microsoft Corporation execfile("disclaimer.py") ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com Wed Dec 4 14:07:34 1996 From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com (Robin Friedrich) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 08:07:34 -0600 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: <199612041407.IAA13816@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> While I agree that this sig should be a focused thing, I don't feel that allowing other facets of text processing enter into it to be a defocusing force. In general the folks contributing efforts toward a new regex module are not going to be sidetracked by discussions about string concatenation. I think contributions in the regex and non-regex area will come from different individuals (I for one won't be contributing any regex code, just opinions;-) so I don't see discussions of non-regex nature to be harmful. Indeed, I think we can take the project focus a little too far. In that case we should call these things Project Mail Lists rather than Special Interest Groups. I have an interest in efficient text processing not just regex so it seems over constrained to have a regex-sig, string-sig, formatting-sig, etc., preordained. I vote for it being called TEXT-SIG with a focus on regex and other text processing tools. (If it's a regex-sig would I be flamed for bringing up a replacement for regsub?) Greg's point is good - have people pony up ideas and see what gets worked. If another topic grows in popularity than we can fork and exec. That's how the Image-Sig spawned from the Matrix-Sig. Trying to predict this kind of thing ahead of time is dubious in my view. The success indicator of SIGS seems to be whether or not someone is willing to do lots of good programming. That really doesn't change as a function of the SIG's name. -Robin Friedrich ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From fdrake@CNRI.Reston.Va.US Wed Dec 4 14:22:11 1996 From: fdrake@CNRI.Reston.Va.US (Fred L. Drake) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 09:22:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG In-Reply-To: <199612041407.IAA13816@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> from "Robin Friedrich" at Dec 4, 96 08:07:34 am Message-ID: <199612041422.JAA23040@weyr.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> > While I agree that this sig should be a focused thing, I don't feel > that allowing other facets of text processing enter into it to be a I'm going to jump in here since I not only have an opinion, but think that it's particularly relevant to the problem you're pointing out. I don't think Barry was trying to separate things like high performance string catenation from the regex-group or other aspects of what's being called "text processing" here. What I think Barry was pointing out, and what my point is, is that these low level facilities are very different from the larger document structuring / formatting and information retrieval facilities which have also been mentioned. I can envision a distinct separation of discussions of low-level from high-level facilities; the participants may overlap, but probably not too much. I know my own interests lie entirely with the larger document / IR topics; others may be interested only in regex or other low-level string processing topics. I'd like to propose that the name for a SIG interested in low-level string processing be called string-sig; a name can be picked for the (potential) high level group when someone decides to start one. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. fdrake@cnri.reston.va.us Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive Reston, VA 20191-5434 ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com Wed Dec 4 15:35:13 1996 From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com (Robin Friedrich) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 09:35:13 -0600 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: <199612041535.JAA13853@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> OK I can go with STRING-SIG given this understanding. I'll try working up a modified web page tomorrow night. |> From: "Fred L. Drake" |> I'd like to propose that the name for a SIG interested in low-level |> string processing be called string-sig; a name can be picked for the |> (potential) high level group when someone decides to start one. |> ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From Barry A. Warsaw" <199612041422.JAA23040@weyr.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> Message-ID: <199612041557.KAA14540@anthem.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> >>>>> "Fred" == Fred L Drake writes: Fred> I don't think Barry was trying to separate things like high Fred> performance string catenation from the regex-group or other Fred> aspects of what's being called "text processing" here. What Fred> I think Barry was pointing out, and what my point is, is Fred> that these low level facilities are very different from the Fred> larger document structuring / formatting and information Fred> retrieval facilities which have also been mentioned. Exactly. And I certainly would never discourage anybody from working on an IR module! But it does seem to be at a different level than regex/regsub/string interpolation/etc. Just my opinion though, and I'll of course set up whatever kind of list will encourage the most worthwhile contribution! -Barry ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From paul@digicool.com Wed Dec 4 16:22:58 1996 From: paul@digicool.com (Paul Everitt) Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 11:22:58 -0500 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG References: <199612041422.JAA23040@weyr.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> Message-ID: <32A5A562.29CD@digicool.com> Fred L. Drake wrote: > I'd like to propose that the name for a SIG interested in low-level > string processing be called string-sig; a name can be picked for the > (potential) high level group when someone decides to start one. I'd like to further this. We shouldn't form a SIG for future requirements but for current requirements. I speak from experience: I invented a problem and created a SIG (the Locator SIG). Subsequently, I discovered no one else really cared about the problem I invented and certainly weren't going to make time to contribute. It is quite obvious that people are interested in regex work. More importantly, there are real people doing real work today. That should be the sanity check on the SIG's mission statement. -- Paul Everitt Digital Creations paul@digicool.com 540.371.6909 ## Python is my favorite language ## ## http://www.python.org/ ## ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From gstein@microsoft.com Mon Dec 2 19:19:58 1996 From: gstein@microsoft.com (Greg Stein) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 11:19:58 -0800 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: Would something like a free-text searching engine fall into this SIG? People have rumbled about having that for about a year now... -g -- Greg Stein, Microsoft Corporation execfile("disclaimer.py") >---------- >From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com[SMTP:friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com] >Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 1996 5:55 AM >To: meta-sig@python.org; bwarsaw@CNRI.Reston.Va.US >Cc: kpyee@aw.sgi.com >Subject: Re: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG > > >Woops. I guess I stepped in it since I just posted the New Regex module >spark to comp.lang.python. I'll start working up an info document... >... phunie no one's replied to it yet :-| > >================= >META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists > >send messages to: meta-sig@python.org >administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org >================= > ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com Mon Dec 2 19:45:26 1996 From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com (Robin Friedrich) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 13:45:26 -0600 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: <199612021945.NAA12261@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> |> From: Greg Stein |> Would something like a free-text searching engine fall into this SIG? |> People have rumbled about having that for about a year now... |> |> -g Yes, my vote would be affirmative. (do i sound official or what!) On the Text-SIG page which should be up on python.org soon I mention that a raft of useful tools could be collected by such a sig to aid folks (newbies or oldbies) with text processing needs. This is somewhat (but not far) outside the regex rework. Other things I see folded into a collection include report formatting tools, optimized string concatenation, maybe interpolation tools, fuzzy match searches, etc. -Robin Friedrich ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From kpyee@aw.sgi.com Tue Dec 3 02:58:03 1996 From: kpyee@aw.sgi.com (Ka-Ping Yee) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 11:58:03 +0900 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG References: <199612021945.NAA12261@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> Message-ID: <32A3973B.4487@aw.sgi.com> Robin Friedrich wrote: > > On the Text-SIG page which should be up on python.org soon I mention > that a raft of useful tools could be collected by such a sig to aid > folks (newbies or oldbies) with text processing needs. This is > somewhat (but not far) outside the regex rework. Other things I see > folded into a collection include report formatting tools, optimized > string concatenation, maybe interpolation tools, fuzzy match searches, > etc. All sound good. Boy, we have a big wishlist on our hands... :) Ping Developer, Alias|Wavefront Inc. (Tokyo) http://www.lfw.org/math/ brings math to the Web as easy as ?pi? ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From Barry A. Warsaw" Message-ID: <199612031621.LAA13741@anthem.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> >>>>> "GS" == Greg Stein writes: GS> Would something like a free-text searching engine fall into GS> this SIG? People have rumbled about having that for about a GS> year now... My vote would be no. I'm all for starting an IR-SIG or some such at a later date, but I think this sig should concentrate on improving the language's intrinsic string manipulation features. I think it's primary goal should be a new regular expression module with secondary issues such as string interpolation open for discussion. I think those are going to be big and tough enough, but with large potential of payoff. Keeping the sig's mission as focussed as possible increases the chances of it's success. I think that's the model we've come to favor with the SIGs. Given this view, maybe TEXT-SIG isn't the best name for it. What about STRING-SIG or REGEX-SIG? -Barry ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From gstein@microsoft.com Wed Dec 4 04:06:05 1996 From: gstein@microsoft.com (Greg Stein) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 20:06:05 -0800 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: >---------- >From: Barry A. Warsaw[SMTP:bwarsaw@anthem.cnri.reston.va.us] >Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 1996 8:21 AM >To: Greg Stein >Cc: 'meta-sig@python.org'; 'friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com'; >'kpyee@aw.sgi.com' >Subject: RE: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG >My vote would be no. I'm all for starting an IR-SIG or some such at a >later date, but I think this sig should concentrate on improving the >language's intrinsic string manipulation features. I think it's >primary goal should be a new regular expression module with secondary >issues such as string interpolation open for discussion. I think >those are going to be big and tough enough, but with large potential >of payoff. > >Keeping the sig's mission as focussed as possible increases the >chances of it's success. I think that's the model we've come to favor >with the SIGs. > >Given this view, maybe TEXT-SIG isn't the best name for it. What >about STRING-SIG or REGEX-SIG? No problem with me... if that's the focus, then I'd call it string-sig. I think the easiest way to determine what the focus actually is, is to ask the people who are planning to be involved over the next 3 months, "What do you want to contribute?" (talk is cheap :-). If the contributors never say free-text search... out it goes! That should keep the sig tightly focused and should keep it matched up with what people will actually be doing. -g -- Greg Stein, Microsoft Corporation execfile("disclaimer.py") ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com Wed Dec 4 14:07:34 1996 From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com (Robin Friedrich) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 08:07:34 -0600 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: <199612041407.IAA13816@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> While I agree that this sig should be a focused thing, I don't feel that allowing other facets of text processing enter into it to be a defocusing force. In general the folks contributing efforts toward a new regex module are not going to be sidetracked by discussions about string concatenation. I think contributions in the regex and non-regex area will come from different individuals (I for one won't be contributing any regex code, just opinions;-) so I don't see discussions of non-regex nature to be harmful. Indeed, I think we can take the project focus a little too far. In that case we should call these things Project Mail Lists rather than Special Interest Groups. I have an interest in efficient text processing not just regex so it seems over constrained to have a regex-sig, string-sig, formatting-sig, etc., preordained. I vote for it being called TEXT-SIG with a focus on regex and other text processing tools. (If it's a regex-sig would I be flamed for bringing up a replacement for regsub?) Greg's point is good - have people pony up ideas and see what gets worked. If another topic grows in popularity than we can fork and exec. That's how the Image-Sig spawned from the Matrix-Sig. Trying to predict this kind of thing ahead of time is dubious in my view. The success indicator of SIGS seems to be whether or not someone is willing to do lots of good programming. That really doesn't change as a function of the SIG's name. -Robin Friedrich ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From fdrake@CNRI.Reston.Va.US Wed Dec 4 14:22:11 1996 From: fdrake@CNRI.Reston.Va.US (Fred L. Drake) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 09:22:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG In-Reply-To: <199612041407.IAA13816@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> from "Robin Friedrich" at Dec 4, 96 08:07:34 am Message-ID: <199612041422.JAA23040@weyr.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> > While I agree that this sig should be a focused thing, I don't feel > that allowing other facets of text processing enter into it to be a I'm going to jump in here since I not only have an opinion, but think that it's particularly relevant to the problem you're pointing out. I don't think Barry was trying to separate things like high performance string catenation from the regex-group or other aspects of what's being called "text processing" here. What I think Barry was pointing out, and what my point is, is that these low level facilities are very different from the larger document structuring / formatting and information retrieval facilities which have also been mentioned. I can envision a distinct separation of discussions of low-level from high-level facilities; the participants may overlap, but probably not too much. I know my own interests lie entirely with the larger document / IR topics; others may be interested only in regex or other low-level string processing topics. I'd like to propose that the name for a SIG interested in low-level string processing be called string-sig; a name can be picked for the (potential) high level group when someone decides to start one. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. fdrake@cnri.reston.va.us Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive Reston, VA 20191-5434 ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com Wed Dec 4 15:35:13 1996 From: friedric@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com (Robin Friedrich) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 09:35:13 -0600 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG Message-ID: <199612041535.JAA13853@darwin.rsoc.rockwell.com> OK I can go with STRING-SIG given this understanding. I'll try working up a modified web page tomorrow night. |> From: "Fred L. Drake" |> I'd like to propose that the name for a SIG interested in low-level |> string processing be called string-sig; a name can be picked for the |> (potential) high level group when someone decides to start one. |> ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From Barry A. Warsaw" <199612041422.JAA23040@weyr.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> Message-ID: <199612041557.KAA14540@anthem.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> >>>>> "Fred" == Fred L Drake writes: Fred> I don't think Barry was trying to separate things like high Fred> performance string catenation from the regex-group or other Fred> aspects of what's being called "text processing" here. What Fred> I think Barry was pointing out, and what my point is, is Fred> that these low level facilities are very different from the Fred> larger document structuring / formatting and information Fred> retrieval facilities which have also been mentioned. Exactly. And I certainly would never discourage anybody from working on an IR module! But it does seem to be at a different level than regex/regsub/string interpolation/etc. Just my opinion though, and I'll of course set up whatever kind of list will encourage the most worthwhile contribution! -Barry ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org ================= From paul@digicool.com Wed Dec 4 16:22:58 1996 From: paul@digicool.com (Paul Everitt) Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 11:22:58 -0500 Subject: [PYTHON META-SIG] RFC: TEXT-SIG References: <199612041422.JAA23040@weyr.CNRI.Reston.Va.US> Message-ID: <32A5A562.29CD@digicool.com> Fred L. Drake wrote: > I'd like to propose that the name for a SIG interested in low-level > string processing be called string-sig; a name can be picked for the > (potential) high level group when someone decides to start one. I'd like to further this. We shouldn't form a SIG for future requirements but for current requirements. I speak from experience: I invented a problem and created a SIG (the Locator SIG). Subsequently, I discovered no one else really cared about the problem I invented and certainly weren't going to make time to contribute. It is quite obvious that people are interested in regex work. More importantly, there are real people doing real work today. That should be the sanity check on the SIG's mission statement. -- Paul Everitt Digital Creations paul@digicool.com 540.371.6909 ## Python is my favorite language ## ## http://www.python.org/ ## ================= META-SIG - SIG on Python.Org SIGs and Mailing Lists send messages to: meta-sig@python.org administrivia to: meta-sig-request@python.org =================