It looks like here the only worth words are yours. Didn't you close this thread?
I will refresh your mind with your own unpolite way:
""" Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...]
closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 """
Anyway, I will add some comments:
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.
Good for you.
of course I must first know, that the python-team would accept those patches (technical applicability provided).
There is no guaranty. Did you forget the reply from Tim Peters:
> [...] A problem is that a > patch won't get reviewed unless a volunteer does a review, and we've > got an increasing backlog of unreviewed patches because of that. The > most effective way for a person P to get their patch reviewed now is > for P to volunteer to review 5 other patches first. There are a few > Python developers who have promised, in return, to review P's patch > then. So, you will have to review some patches first.
>Ilias> Now, can you please tell me the process I have to follow to >Ilias> suggest the following (to the PSF or to the programmers or to >Ilias> the decision takers),possibly to get at least a vote on it:
>Tim> No such thing will happen -- forget that. For MinGW to be >Tim> supported forever, it's necessary and sufficient that a specific >Tim> person volunteer to support MinGW forever. If that person goes >Tim> away, so does the support they provided; it's the same story for >Tim> Cygwin, and even for Linux and native Windows. So, it is not just making the patch. You will have to compromise to support it and not just go away.
Regards, Josef -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
