patch for review: __import__ documentation

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

patch for review: __import__ documentation

Chris Jerdonek-3
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
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Brett Cannon-2


On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 20:54, Chris Jerdonek <[hidden email]> 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

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Chris Jerdonek-3
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Brett Cannon <[hidden email]> 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
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Brett Cannon-2


On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 13:41, Chris Jerdonek <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Brett Cannon <[hidden email]> 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 

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Glyph Lefkowitz
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).
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Glyph Lefkowitz
In reply to this post by Brett Cannon-2

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? :)


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Brett Cannon-2

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" <[hidden email]> 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? :)


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Brett Cannon-2

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" <[hidden email]> 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? :)


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Brett Cannon-2

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" <[hidden email]> 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? :)


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Brett Cannon-2
In reply to this post by Chris Jerdonek-3

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" <[hidden email]> 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? :)


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

Brett Cannon-2
I am aware my email has gone out multiple times. My phone kept saying that it was not sent, so I kept trying to force it to send. Sorry about the extra emails.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:50, Brett Cannon <[hidden email]> wrote:

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" <[hidden email]> 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? :)



_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch for review: __import__ documentation

"Martin v. Löwis"
In reply to this post by Brett Cannon-2
> 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
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%40nabble.com