<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM, <a href="mailto:fwierzbicki@gmail.com">fwierzbicki@gmail.com</a> <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:fwierzbicki@gmail.com" target="_blank">fwierzbicki@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Brett Cannon &lt;<a href="mailto:brett@python.org">brett@python.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>


&gt; R. David already replied to this, but just to reiterate: tests can always<br>
&gt; get updated, and code that fixes a bug (and leaving a file open can be<br>
&gt; considered a bug) can also go in. It&#39;s just stuff like code refactoring,<br>
&gt; speed improvements, etc. that can&#39;t go into Python 2.7 at this point.<br>
</div>Thanks for the clarification!<br>
<div class="im"><br>
&gt; If/until the stdlib is made into its own repo, should the various VMs<br>
&gt; consider keeping a common Python 2.7 repo that contains nothing but the<br>
&gt; stdlib (or at least just modifications to those) so they can modify in ways<br>
&gt; that CPython can&#39;t accept because of compatibility policy? You could keep it<br>
&gt; on <a href="http://hg.python.org" target="_blank">hg.python.org</a> (or wherever) and then all push to it. This might also be a<br>
&gt; good way to share Python implementations of extension modules for Python 2.7<br>
&gt; instead of everyone maintaining there own for the next few years (although I<br>
&gt; think those modules should go into the stdlib directly for Python 3 as<br>
&gt; well). Basically this could be a test to see if communication and<br>
&gt; collaboration will be high enough among the other VMs to bother with<br>
&gt; breaking out the actual stdlib into its own repo or if it would just be a<br>
&gt; big waste of time.<br>
</div>I&#39;d be up for trying this. I don&#39;t think it&#39;s easy to fork a<br>
subdirectory of CPython though - right now I just keep an unchanged<br>
copy of the 2.7 LIb in our repo (PyPy does the same, at least the last<br>
time I checked).<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Looks like hg doesn&#39;t have support yet: <a href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/920355/how-do-i-clone-a-sub-folder-of-a-repository-in-mercurial">http://stackoverflow.com/questions/920355/how-do-i-clone-a-sub-folder-of-a-repository-in-mercurial</a> .</div>

<div> </div><div>The only sane option I can see then is to keep doing what you and PyPy are doing and keep a copy of the stdlib, but now you all simply share the repo instead of keeping your own copies and possibly use subrepos to pull it into your own hg repos.</div>

<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
&gt; P.S. Do we need a python-implementations mailing list or something for<br>
&gt; discussing overall VM-related stuff among all VMs instead of always bringing<br>
&gt; this up on python-dev? E.g. I wish I had a place where I could get all the<br>
&gt; VM stakeholders&#39; attention to make sure that importlib as it stands in<br>
&gt; Python 3.3 will skip trying to import Python bytecode properly (or if the<br>
&gt; VMs will simply provide their own setup function and that won&#39;t be a worry).<br>
&gt; And I would have no problem with keeping it like python-committers in terms<br>
&gt; of closed subscriptions, open archive in order to keep the noise low.<br>
</div>I think a python-implementations list would be a fantastic idea - I<br>
sometimes miss multi-implementation discussions in python-dev, or at<br>
least come in very late.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If other people agree then I will get Barry to create it. </div></div>

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /