Hi,
Thanks for the replies; I will probably look into decoratortools to see
its cool features. I may request some of them on bugs.python.org, don’t
hesitate to do the same :)
Cheers
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Co
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 13:58:19 Jakub Wilk wrote:
> On the other hand, ftp-masters are not fans of tiny packages:
> http://bugs.debian.org/606411
Then, maybe, is better to preserve the actual situation...
> s/virtual/transitional/?
Of course.
--
Daniele Tricoli 'Eriol'
http://mornie.org
s
* Daniele Tricoli , 2011-05-31, 13:41:
That said, I'm not a fan of package bundles like python-peak.util.
If no one is against it, I can split python-peak.util into individual
packages
On the other hand, ftp-masters are not fans of tiny packages:
http://bugs.debian.org/606411
and transform
On Monday 30 May 2011 20:24:15 Jakub Wilk wrote:
> That said, I'm not a fan of package bundles like python-peak.util.
If no one is against it, I can split python-peak.util into individual
packages and transform it into a virtual package.
Kind regards,
--
Daniele Tricoli 'Eriol'
http://mornie
* Daniele Tricoli , 2011-05-30, 19:41:
I discovered that decoratortools was orphaned working on #607083. My
first thought was to include decoratortools in python-peak.util, but
the former has a popcon score about twice the latter. In addiction
after this change python-peak.rules, python-protoco
On Monday 30 May 2011 19:41:20 Daniele Tricoli wrote:
> In addiction after this change python-peak.rules, python-protocols and
> python-turbogears have to be fixed.
I can volunteer to manage this fixing work but python-protocols is not
under the DPMT umbrella.
What do you think?
Cheers,
--
Hello,
On Monday 30 May 2011 16:40:36 Jakub Wilk wrote:
> 1. (Quoting long description:) "It provides [...] support for
> decorating arbitrary assignments, synchronized methods, and more." I
> didn't check what "more" means, though. ;)
More means:
- signature matching
- debug generated code
- "m
* Éric Araujo , 2011-05-30, 15:56:
python-decoratortools - version-agnostic decorators support for Python
I’m curious about the usefulness of this package. Special syntax for
function decorators is built-in in Python 2.4+ and the class
counterpart is available in 2.6+ and 3.x. Why would we n
Hi,
> python-decoratortools - version-agnostic decorators support for Python
I’m curious about the usefulness of this package. Special syntax for
function decorators is built-in in Python 2.4+ and the class counterpart
is available in 2.6+ and 3.x. Why would we need support for older
versions t
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "decoratortools".
It builds these binary packages:
python-decoratortools - version-agnostic decorators support for Python
The upload would fix these bugs: #590781
The package appears to be lintian clean, except for the following:
P: python
10 matches
Mail list logo
