2009/2/17 Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net>:
> Benjamin Peterson schrieb:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Samuele Pedroni <pedronis at openend.se> wrote:
>>> Didn't a test fail because of this? seems the underlying issue is that this
>>> part of the stdlib didn't have enough test coverage. It seems that having
>>> very good/improving test coverage like is recommended for 3rd-party project
>>> wanting to switch would be a good goal for 3.0 evolution too. We know from
>>> PyPy experience that while always improving the test suite coverage is quite
>>> spotty at times.
>>
>> No, a test didn't fail. Our new distutils maintainer, Tarek Ziade,
>> though, has been increasing the distutils test coverage greatly.
I'll add one in that area.
Note that I am also planning to:
- remove in the current trunk things like cmp() so the code looks
similar in trunk and py3k
-> so if you change something in py3k branch in distutils, if you
have time please backport it to the trunk
right away when appliable
- release Distutils at PyPI on its own, (stable releases, and dev
releases) following Marc-André suggestion.
this will use externals, (see http://svn.python.org/projects/distutils/trunk/)
So it should be simpler to work things out between two Python releases
Regards
Tarek
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