[Python-Dev] PEP 3145 (With Contents) (original) (raw)

Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Thu Dec 20 22:12:40 CET 2012

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek at gmail.com>wrote:

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote: > > And please do not CC the peps mailing list on discussions. It should only be > used to mail in new PEPs or acceptable patches to PEPs.

PEP 1 should perhaps be clarified if the above is the case. Currently, PEP 1 says all PEP-related e-mail should be sent there: "The PEP editors assign PEP numbers and change their status. Please send all PEP-related email to <peps at python.org> (no cross-posting please). Also see PEP Editor Responsibilities & Workflow below." as well as: "A PEP editor must subscribe to the <peps at python.org> list. All PEP-related correspondence should be sent (or CC'd) to <peps at python.org> (but please do not cross-post!)." (Incidentally, the statement not to cross-post seems contradictory if a PEP-related e-mail is also sent to python-dev, for example.)

But it very clearly states to NOT cross-post which is exactly what Anatoly did and that is what I take issue with the most. I personally don't see any confusion with the wording. It clearly states that if you are a PEP author you should mail the peps editors and NOT cross-post. If you are an editor, make sure any emailing you do with an individual CCs the list but do NOT cross-post.

-Brett

--Chris

> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:20 PM, anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Gregory P. Smith <greg at krypto.org> wrote: >>> >>> I'm really not sure what this PEP is trying to get at given that it >>> contains no examples and sounds from the descriptions to be adding a >>> complicated api on top of something that already, IMNSHO, has too much it >>> (subprocess.Popen). >>> >>> Regardless, any user can use the stdout/err/in file objects with their >>> own code that handles them asynchronously (yes that can be painful but that >>> is what is required for any socket or pipe I/O you don't want to block >>> on). >> >> >> And how to use stdout/stderr/in asynchronously in cross-platform manner? >> IIUC the problem is that every read is blocking. >> >>> >>> It sounds to me like this entire PEP could be written and released as a >>> third party module on PyPI that offers a subprocess.Popen subclass adding >>> some more convenient non-blocking APIs. That's where I'd start if I were >>> interested in this as a future feature. >> >> >> I've rewritten the PEP based on how do I understand the code. I don't know >> how to update it and how to comply with open documentation license, so I >> just attach it and add PEPs list to CC. Me too has a feeling that the PEP >> should be stripped of additional high level API until low level >> functionality is well understood and accepted. >> >> -- >> anatoly t. >> _>> ________________________ >> Python-Dev mailing list >> Python-Dev at python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev >> Unsubscribe: >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/brett%40python.org >> > > _> ________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/chris.jerdonek%40gmail.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20121220/9f1da9a1/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list