[Python-Dev] Python-Dev Digest, Vol 108, Issue 7

Ryan Paullin ryanpaullin at gmail.com
Tue Jul 10 23:04:07 CEST 2012 

thanks for the reply hastings ive been working on a loopback interface its
done

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:00 AM, <python-dev-request at python.org> wrote:

> Send Python-Dev mailing list submissions to
>         python-dev at python.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         python-dev-request at python.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         python-dev-owner at python.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Python-Dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: GitHub mirror (Was: Bitbucket mirror?) (martin at v.loewis.de)
>    2. Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] itertools.chunks(iterable,
>       size, fill=None)) (anatoly techtonik)
>    3. Re: Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas]
>       itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) (Mark Lawrence)
>    4. Re: Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas]
>       itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) (Stefan Behnel)
>    5. Re: Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas]
>       itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) (Paul Boddie)
>    6. EuroPython 2012 Language Summit is Canceled. (Larry Hastings)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 20:27:02 +0200
> From: martin at v.loewis.de
> To: python-dev at python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] GitHub mirror (Was: Bitbucket mirror?)
> Message-ID:
>         <20120705202702.Horde.Yh-RBqGZi1VP9dx2H7Nj-nA at webmail.df.eu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes
>
> >> You won't get any changes in to CPython by creating pull requests. We
> >> use http://bugs.python.org/ for that, sorry.
> >
> > Question -- is there a reason to abide by this rule for docs?  That is,
> if we
> > could get a sympathetic core dev to look at pull requests for docs as
> part of
> > a streamlined process, would it cause problems?
>
> How do you communicate a "pull request"? On bitbucket, there is a
> "pull request"
> UI resulting in a tracker item being generated (and an email being sent),
> but
> hg.python.org doesn't have a notion of pull requests. Of course, you could
> use any communication means (email, telephone call, carrier pigeon) to
> request
> a pull from a "sympathetic core dev".
>
> > (What I'm really asking is whether or the bugs.python.org process is
> > considered critical for potentially minor doc changes and additions.)
>
> The sympathetic core dev is mostly free to bypass any submission process
> initially; commits that bypass established procedures will likely be
> questioned
> only after the fact.
>
> In the specific case, I'd be worried to verify that the submitter has
> provided
> a contributor form. That's easy to do in the bug tracker, but difficult to
> do
> in an offline pull request. Of course, for a really minor doc change
> (e.g. typo
> fixes), no contrib form is necessary.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:41:29 +0300
> From: anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com>
> To: Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml at behnel.de>
> Cc: python-ideas at python.org, python-dev at python.org
> Subject: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas]
>         itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None))
> Message-ID:
>         <CAPkN8x+A-OYWNLNKDH=
> 6GnQn+o_Tb3LMnimHYs9zkYmWR1GTgA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml at behnel.de> wrote:
> > anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 15:36:
> >> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >>> From Raymond's first message on http://bugs.python.org/issue6021 , add
> >>> grouper:
> >>>
> >>> "This has been rejected before.
> >>
> >> I quite often see such arguments and I can't stand to repeat that
> >> these are not arguments. It is good to know, but when people use that
> >> as a reason to close tickets - that's just disgusting.
> >
> > The *real* problem is that people keep bringing up topics (and even spell
> > them out in the bug tracker) without searching for existing discussions
> > and/or tickets first. That's why those who do such a search (or who know
> > what they are talking about anyway) close these tickets with the remark
> > "this has been rejected before", instead of repeating an entire heap of
> > arguments all over again to feed a discussion that would only lead to the
> > same result as it did before, often several times before.
>
> Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others
> time? If people don't enjoy repeating themselves over and over - there
> is a bloody wiki. What should happen to people to start extracting
> gems of knowledge from piles of dusty sheets called list "archives"
> for others to admire.
>
> No, it is easier to say "it was already discussed many times", "why
> don't you Google yourself", "so far you're only complaining", etc. If
> people can't find anything - why everybody thinks they are ignorant
> and lazy. Even if it so, why nobody thinks that maybe that bloody
> Xapian index is dead again for a bloody amount of moons nobody knows
> why and how many exactly? Why nobody thinks that lazy coders can also
> help with development? Maybe that laziness is the primary reason some
> major groups actually prefer Python to Java, C++ and other more
> interesting languages (such as PHP) when it comes to typing? Make it
> easy and the patches will follow. Answers like "this was discussed
> before" don't make it easy to understand, and leaving users rereading
> old 19xx archives that people don't reread themselves will likely make
> users bounce and never (NEVER!) come up with some proposal again. An
> "organic" way to keep traffic low.
>
> Miscommunication is a bad experience for users, bad experience for
> developers, everybody is annoyed and as a result such nice language as
> Python loses points on TIOBE (and convenient chunk() functions to
> munch-munch on the sequence data).
>
> Wheew. :-F
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 20:55:09 +0100
> From: Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk>
> To: python-dev at python.org
> Cc: python-ideas at python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas]
>         itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None))
> Message-ID: <jt4re5$3gs$1 at dough.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 05/07/2012 20:41, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml at behnel.de>
> wrote:
> >> anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 15:36:
> >>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >>>>  From Raymond's first message on http://bugs.python.org/issue6021 ,
> add
> >>>> grouper:
> >>>>
> >>>> "This has been rejected before.
> >>>
> >>> I quite often see such arguments and I can't stand to repeat that
> >>> these are not arguments. It is good to know, but when people use that
> >>> as a reason to close tickets - that's just disgusting.
> >>
> >> The *real* problem is that people keep bringing up topics (and even
> spell
> >> them out in the bug tracker) without searching for existing discussions
> >> and/or tickets first. That's why those who do such a search (or who know
> >> what they are talking about anyway) close these tickets with the remark
> >> "this has been rejected before", instead of repeating an entire heap of
> >> arguments all over again to feed a discussion that would only lead to
> the
> >> same result as it did before, often several times before.
> >
> > Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others
> > time? If people don't enjoy repeating themselves over and over - there
> > is a bloody wiki. What should happen to people to start extracting
> > gems of knowledge from piles of dusty sheets called list "archives"
> > for others to admire.
> >
> > No, it is easier to say "it was already discussed many times", "why
> > don't you Google yourself", "so far you're only complaining", etc. If
> > people can't find anything - why everybody thinks they are ignorant
> > and lazy. Even if it so, why nobody thinks that maybe that bloody
> > Xapian index is dead again for a bloody amount of moons nobody knows
> > why and how many exactly? Why nobody thinks that lazy coders can also
> > help with development? Maybe that laziness is the primary reason some
> > major groups actually prefer Python to Java, C++ and other more
> > interesting languages (such as PHP) when it comes to typing? Make it
> > easy and the patches will follow. Answers like "this was discussed
> > before" don't make it easy to understand, and leaving users rereading
> > old 19xx archives that people don't reread themselves will likely make
> > users bounce and never (NEVER!) come up with some proposal again. An
> > "organic" way to keep traffic low.
> >
> > Miscommunication is a bad experience for users, bad experience for
> > developers, everybody is annoyed and as a result such nice language as
> > Python loses points on TIOBE (and convenient chunk() functions to
> > munch-munch on the sequence data).
> >
> > Wheew. :-F
> >
>
> Can I safely assume that you are volunteering to do the work required?
>
> --
> Cheers.
>
> Mark Lawrence.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 21:58:52 +0200
> From: Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml at behnel.de>
> To: python-dev at python.org
> Cc: python-ideas at python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas]
>         itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None))
> Message-ID: <jt4rlt$45k$1 at dough.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 21:41:
> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> >> anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 15:36:
> >>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >>>> From Raymond's first message on http://bugs.python.org/issue6021 ,
> add
> >>>> grouper:
> >>>>
> >>>> "This has been rejected before.
> >>>
> >>> I quite often see such arguments and I can't stand to repeat that
> >>> these are not arguments. It is good to know, but when people use that
> >>> as a reason to close tickets - that's just disgusting.
> >>
> >> The *real* problem is that people keep bringing up topics (and even
> spell
> >> them out in the bug tracker) without searching for existing discussions
> >> and/or tickets first. That's why those who do such a search (or who know
> >> what they are talking about anyway) close these tickets with the remark
> >> "this has been rejected before", instead of repeating an entire heap of
> >> arguments all over again to feed a discussion that would only lead to
> the
> >> same result as it did before, often several times before.
> >
> > Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others
> > time?
>
> Yes, that is exactly the question.
>
> It takes time to write things up nicely. I mean, once someone has pointed
> out to you that this has been discussed before, you could just go, look it
> up (or search for it), and then put it into a Wiki or blog post yourself,
> or sum it up and send it to the mailing list as a reply. Why rely on others
> to do it for you?
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 23:11:46 +0200
> From: Paul Boddie <paul at boddie.org.uk>
> To: python-dev at python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas]
>         itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None))
> Message-ID: <201207052311.46867.paul at boddie.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="utf-8"
>
> Stefan Behnel wrote:
> > anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 21:41:
> > >
> > > Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others
> > > time?
> >
> > Yes, that is exactly the question.
> >
> > It takes time to write things up nicely. I mean, once someone has pointed
> > out to you that this has been discussed before, you could just go, look
> it
> > up (or search for it), and then put it into a Wiki or blog post yourself,
> > or sum it up and send it to the mailing list as a reply. Why rely on
> others
> > to do it for you?
>
> To be fair, Anatoly has done quite a bit of maintenance on some of the Wiki
> content around various aspects of the project, so it's not as if he's
> demanding anything out of the ordinary or asking for others to do things
> that
> he isn't already doing in some sense. My experience is that there usually
> needs to be some willingness on the other end of the transaction, and if it
> takes repetition to encourage it amongst those who don't see the current
> situation as a problem for them, then so be it.
>
> Of course, this kind of documentation activity, where one gathers together
> historical decisions and the consensus from long-forgotten discussions, is
> pretty thankless work. I occasionally regard it as worthwhile if only to
> bring up something someone said as an inconvenient interruption in any
> current discussion, but that's a pretty minimal reward for all the effort
> unless one has such work as part of one's daily routine.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 08:47:30 +0200
> From: Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org>
> To: python-dev at python.org, python-committers at python.org
> Subject: [Python-Dev] EuroPython 2012 Language Summit is Canceled.
> Message-ID: <4FF68A02.8000500 at hastings.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
>
>
> I only got one more RSVP and zero topics for the docket.  So let's
> sprint instead.
>
> See you at the PyCon 2013 Language Summit,
>
>
> //arry/
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120706/f13295aa/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>
>
> End of Python-Dev Digest, Vol 108, Issue 7
> ******************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120710/4dbfe67a/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list