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

Ryan Paullin ryanpaullin at gmail.com
Tue Jul 10 23:04:24 CEST 2012 

spoke too early on its done sorry

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Ryan Paullin <ryanpaullin at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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/df9496e0/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list