-
A.B., Khalid wrote: [...]
Khalid,
first of all I like to thank you for the efforts you have taken to provide pyMinGW to the python community.
I would like to assist you with your efforts, see below.
If passing all the regression tests of the official Windows Python distribution is an indication of the quality of patch-- and pyMinGW patched and MinGW built Python does pass all of them-- then one is inclined to say that pyMinGW is a good patch.
=> {pyMinGW is a good patch}The reason why it is, on the other hand, not included in the official distribution is threefold.
1. Contrary to what many might imagine, I don't think enough people use MinGW to frankly justify any extra effort beyond pyMinGW.
The defined "extra effort" is the effort to provide the patches for the main source-code base?
If you can send me an email of how to do this, I would take this effort.
of course I must first know, that the python-team would accept those patches (technical applicability provided).
Thus this can wait, until an official response.
2. Given number 1 above, this patch, I believe, and I could be mistaken, must not rush to be included in Python's core;
Of course you are right.
people like your esteemed person should test it (note that it is designed not to interfere with your trusted and working official Python, if any);
=> {trusted and working official python}: it is
only when enough people do such testing that there will be a case for it to be included in Python's core.
I agree with you.
If you are willing to extend your project, thus the intrested community members can collaborate, I would like to assist you to do so.
I would try to take away all setup efforts from you.
3. Finally. there is nothing wrong with third-party patches if they get the job done, which I believe is the case with pyMinGW.
You have stated above: "trusted and working official python"
The main goal would be, to get a "trusted and working official python" based on MinGW, _within_ the official source-code-base.
The secondary goal would be, to get a "trusted and working official python" based on MinGW, _with_ a very close to the official source-code-base (possibly with just one #define).
-
Please contact me vial email if you are intrested.
Regards, Khalid
Best Regards,
ILIAS LAZARIDIS
- - -
After some comments, [which did not show to me an intrested of making the above happen (which is fully in the developers rights)], I've simplified my suggestions in the following message:
" thank you for your comments.
I will express my suggestion more practically
* as a first step, I would setup a pyMinGW mailinglist
* intrested people can come together an communicate
* as a second step, I would setup an SVN
* intrested projects could get your patch via SVN
* as a third step, I would find intrested contributors
* which would help testing
* which would help you with codingAll this could happen without (or with very low) efforts for you. "
- - -
I got no answer.
- - -
.
-- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
