On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Jeremy Hylton wrote: > I'm Tim on this issue. As officially appointed release manager for > 2.0, I set some guidelines for checking in code. One is that no > checkin should cause the regression test to fail. If it does, I'll > back it out. > > If you didn't review the contribution guidelines when they were posted > on this list, please look at PEP 200 now. Actually, I did. The thing is, it seems to me there's a huge difference between breaking code, and manifesting that the code is wrong. -- Moshe Zadka <moshez@math.huji.ac.il> There is no IGLU cabal. http://advogato.org/person/moshez
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4