Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Nick Vargish wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the python-community. That one crashed my parser. Sounds like a new Ministry song - "Guido Crashed my Parser". Could be the sequel to "Jesus Built My Hot Rod". -- http:/

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes Stephen Kellett wrote: [...] Who's Guido? Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the python-community. Who is care by time? -- Stephen Kellett Object Media Limitedhttp://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the > python-community. That one crashed my parser. > Thank's for every bit of contribution, which has made this thread an > worthfull insight into the python-community. To really get a s

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: [...] Who's Guido? Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the python-community. - I've send an addition CC of this message to the python-foundation, which will hopefully take some steps to improve the build-system. [EVALUATION] - E02 - S

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

people are just poking you with a stick to > watch you jump? jump: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 Lol, this guy is hopeless :-) Who's Guido? -- Stephen Kellett Object Media Limi

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

u jump? > > jump: > > [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler > Essence: > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 Lol, this guy is hopeless :-) George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Grant Edwards wrote: [...] Um, you realize that nobody in this thread takes you the least bit seriously and people are just poking you with a stick to watch you jump? jump: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

elong to us. >>> - >> >> For great justice! >> >> ;o) > > [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler > Essence: > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 Um, you realize that nobody in this

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

VALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

George Sakkis wrote: "Ilias Lazaridis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Nick Vargish wrote: You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, but you don't get to unilaterally declare a discussion over. [...] The discussion is over. At least the in-top

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

- All your thread are belong to us. This is true ["us" = a few off-topic-freaks] - - - George [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

"Ilias Lazaridis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Nick Vargish wrote: > > You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, > > but you don't get to unilaterally declare a discussion over. > [...] > > The discussion is over. > > At least the in-topi

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Nick Vargish wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Now it's really time to close this thread. I suspect this will fall of deaf ears, but I have to mention that you do not get to "close threads" on Usenet. this is obvious. You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comm

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? A *professionnal developper*, yes. But this is irrelevant to you. -- bruno desthuilliers python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])" -- http://mail.python

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 Nope. You are not entitled to close thread. This is irrelevant. -- bruno desthuilliers python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now it's really time to close this thread. I suspect this will fall of deaf ears, but I have to mention that you do not get to "close threads" on Usenet. You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, but you don't get to unilate

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Martin v. Löwis: > So I have to guess what you could have meant. If you want > to be understood, you might have phrased the question like > this: > > "Should I take answers from people which do not respect coherence > of writings serious?" The main grammatical problem with the question is the

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Summarized Suggestions for the Python Team, PSF, Community): - - - An automated-build-process-system should allow community-members to add their targets (e.g. MinGW) into an special "incubation section", which does not in any way affect the "main section" (which contains the official production

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Martin v. Löwis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should I take answers serious? [...] Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? [...] I still detect the coherence. As most people in this group will detect the coherence. I don't. The second fragment is not even correct English [...

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

On 2005-02-20, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If you would have written: >> >> """ >> Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect >> coherence of writings? >> """ >> >> it would have been much more coherent. > > I understand. I doubt it. > I still det

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should I take answers serious? . . . . Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? - - - I still detect the coherence. As most people in this group will detect the coherence. I don't. The second fragment is not even correct English (it does not have a verb

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > I understand. no. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Jan Dries wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] - (things which justify inability of coherence-detection) If you would have written: """ Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? """ it would have been much more coherent. I understand. Let's see:

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: they above 2 questions are coherent, thus answering isolated [as you've done] makes not much sense. " >> Should I take answers serious? >> Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? " Except that the quote here above is NOT what was in your original p

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Martin v. Löwis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should I take answers serious? If not, why are you asking questions in the first place? simply read the next question, which limits the scope of the first one. Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? Coherence of writings? An exam

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should I take answers serious? If not, why are you asking questions in the first place? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? Coherence of writings? Should a professional developer take python serious? Yes. I mean, if the team does not manage at least

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Fredrik Lundh wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. Should I take answers serious? yes. Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? coherence of writings? Ironic, is it not? I think he's referring to the fact that you snipped

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: >>>Should a professional developer take python serious? >> >> yes. > > Should I take answers serious? yes. > Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? coherence of writings? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Martin v. Löwis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? Yes. Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? " Should a professional developer take python serious? I mean, if the team does not manage at least t

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Fredrik Lundh wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? " Should a professional developer take python serious? I mean, if the team does not manage at least the

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? Yes. Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Thank you for the links. They are irrelevant for me. As usual. sorry. Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you planning to write? I estimate 10 to 100, depending on abstractional capabilities of the extension system. And how many lines of pure python code

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

> Thank you for the links. > > They are irrelevant for me. As usual. >> Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you planning to >> write? > > I estimate 10 to 100, depending on abstractional capabilities of the > extension system. > >> And how many lines of pure python code hav

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? [...] - (ungentle babbling after disrupting coherence of writings) And that from you *lol* Of course. I respect the "coherence of writings" of my conversation partners. [I

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > Diez B. Roggisch wrote: >>>Should a professional developer take python serious? > [...] - (ungentle babbling after disrupting coherence of writings) And that from you *lol* > I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a > multi-target automated-bu

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? [...] - (ungentle babbling after disrupting coherence of writings) " Should a professional developer take python serious? I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-proce

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

> Unnecessary and deliberately provoking question - python is taken > seriously, e.g. by multi-billion dollar companies like google and zope. Of course zope corporation is not amongst the multi-billion dollar companies - by now. But who knows :) -- Regards, Diez B. Roggisch -- http://mail.pyth

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

> Should a professional developer take python serious? Unnecessary and deliberately provoking question - python is taken seriously, e.g. by multi-billion dollar companies like google and zope. You OTH have provided no evidence so far that you can be taken seriously as a developer of whatever kind

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Martin v. Löwis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: My questions: It appears that nobody has answered the questions, yet. a) Why does the Python Foundation not provide additionally a binary version, compiled with MinGW or another open-source compiler? We don't have the resources to do that. Should a pro

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: My questions: It appears that nobody has answered the questions, yet. a) Why does the Python Foundation not provide additionally a binary version, compiled with MinGW or another open-source compiler? We don't have the resources to do that. b) Why does the Python Foundation n

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Robert Kern schreef: > And yet there is not one company that has someone devoted full-time to > developing Python. Except for 'future Python' aka PyPy... :) -- JanC "Be strict when sending and tolerant when receiving." RFC 1958

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Mike Meyer wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Joe Francia wrote: [...] http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Michael Hoffman schrieb: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: But don't act like the volunteers who develop Python owe you a version of Python that runs out of the box on MinGW. They don't, anymore than you owe *me* a version of Python that runs out of the box on MinGW. Please, leave him alone. When he posted he

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mike Meyer wrote: >> Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>>Mike Meyer wrote: >>> >It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. >>> >>>It is an community need [at least partially] >> Repeati

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 17:24, Jeff Shannon wrote: > Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > > > Adam DePrince wrote: > > [...] > >> You're on it. You drive a car? You have to treat it right to get what > >> you want, right? Same here. Ask correctly, and you will get your > >> answers. > > Your interpretatio

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] Clearly not. If it was, using your logic, it would already exist. -- Stephen Kellett Object Media Limitedhttp://www.objmedia.demon.

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes The community is everyone around python (including me at this moment). Based on the communities response to you (and the similar response you are getting in c.l.ruby) you are not a member of either community as you contin

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis a écrit : bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: (snip) impressive. but things are much simpler. Could you be more prolific ? Please explain the word "prolific". Say more -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Adam DePrince wrote: [...] You're on it. You drive a car? You have to treat it right to get what you want, right? Same here. Ask correctly, and you will get your answers. Your interpretation/definition of "asking correctly" is irrelevant to me. "Interpretation is irrel

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

On 2005-02-15, bruno modulix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > >> impressive. >> >> but things are much simpler. > > Could you be more prolific ? Good god, let's hope not! -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm working under

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

In his 15 post on this thread within 5 hours, "Ilias Lazaridis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > Please explain the word "prolific". -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Joe Francia wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] You keep using that word "community". I do not think it means what you think it means. The community is everyone around python (including

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

I'm 'closing' this thread now [means that I do possibly not respond anymore to messages]. Thank you for your time and effort. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Tim Peters wrote: [...] - (thorough comments) Thank you very much for your thoroug comments. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joe Francia wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] You keep using that word "community". I do not think it means what you think it means. The community

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mike Meyer wrote: It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. It is an community need [at least partially] Repeating a falsehood will not make it true. Can you offer anything besides your own whinin

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joe Francia wrote: >> Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > [...] >>> MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. >>> >>> It is an community need [at least partially] >> You keep using that word "community". I do not think it means what >> you think it means. > > Th

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mike Meyer wrote: >>>It is an community need. >> Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. > It is an community need [at least partially] Repeating a falsehood will not make it true. Can you offer anything besides your own whining to

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Adam DePrince wrote: [...] If the community needs it, a member of said community has both complete unfettered freedom and a supportive environment to make it. Which is this "supportive environment"? You're on it. You drive a car? You have to treat it right to get what you want, right? Same he

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

On 2005-02-15, Adam DePrince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You didn't intent to, but you begging. Sure, you save some face by not > obviously groveling, but that only makes the slight worse. Now somebody > asked that you to read > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html. Read it in

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 14:25, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > Adam DePrince wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 13:29, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > >>Mike Meyer wrote: > >>>Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...] > >>MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. > >> > >>It is an community need [at least

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Joe Francia wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] You keep using that word "community". I do not think it means what you think it means. The community is everyone around python (including me at this moment). We c

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

[Tim Peters] >> Well, I'm a Director of the Python Software Foundation, and my view is >> "the more platforms the merrier". [Ilias Lazaridis] > I extract: "you are intrested, that the source-code-base compiles > directly with MinGW (and other compilers)". Sure, I'm in favor of that. I'm also in

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MinGW compatibility is not my need. Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given to you? It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. MinGW co

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base. Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to open

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Adam DePrince wrote: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 13:29, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] And herein lies the beauty of the noble meritocratic free software mov

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 13:29, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > Mike Meyer wrote: > > Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >>MinGW compatibility is not my need. > > > > Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given > > to you? > > > >>It is an community need. > > > >

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base. Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to open source. They are cur

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MinGW compatibility is not my need. Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given to you? It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. MinGW compatibility is not [only]

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base. Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to open source. They are currently trying to port P

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base. Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to open source. They are currently trying to port Python to .NET, and wh

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > MinGW compatibility is not my need. Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given to you? > It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. http://www.mired.org/home

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes The answer to most of your questions is, "Because no one has yet volunteered their time and effort to get the job done." this answer do not fit in most questions. please review them again. There you

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Diez B. Roggisch wrote: One of the most funny things within open-source is that switching: first: "we have powerfull solutions which beat this and that" then: "hey, this is just volunteer work" I don't see the contradiction here. It beats a great deal of commercial solutions in a lot of ways. But n

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes the community do not care about essential needs and requirements. Wrong. They do. They just don't care about *your* essential needs and requirements which *you* want *others* to fulfill at *their* c

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Simon Brunning wrote: On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:23:08 +0200, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (snip) But if those answers above were of official nature, I must seriously rethink if I can rely on _any_ system which is based on python, as the foundation and the community do not care about ess

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Horsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes Stephen Kellett wrote: Who's "Guido"? LOL Falling off my chair!! I think the expression you are looking for is ROFL! :-) Yes, but with that I could've been standing up before ending up on the fl

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: >> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > > I know this document. > > It has no relevance to me. QOTW! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Delaney, Timothy C (Timothy) wrote: Stephen Kellett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes And yet there is not one company that has someone devoted full-time to developing Python. Not even Guido. Who's "Guido"? LOL Falling off my chair!! See, the pro

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Robert Kern wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] Questions and suggestions are don't count for much in this community. Code and well-written patches do. Stop wasting time on c.l.py and get to work! If you can't do that, then this is not the community you are looking for. Please speak for yourself. I

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: If it is a programming language, the requirement "using an open-source toolchain" is a rational and valid one. It is. However, mingW has nothing to do with "using an open-sourcer toolchain". Python runs in an environment with a full, ope

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Tim Peters wrote: [Ilias Lazaridis] ... Let's see: The process would be: a) A Python Foundation official states: "of course we accept diversity and of course we are intrested that our source-code-base compiles directly with MinGW (and other compilers)". Well, I'm a Director of the Python Software F

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

"jfj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 5. nobody is a troll and there is no trolling going on. http://tinyurl.com/6xmfz -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[Ilias Lazaridis] >... . . . >That leaves volunteers, or a company that wants what you want enough >to pay for it on their own (which has happened, but not

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Pat wrote: I think the same applies to developers. Not every programmer is willing to go through a lot of pain and effort just to get something simple to work. True... but given I.L.'s insistence on a rather stringent set of requirements (fully open-source toolchain to produce closed-source so

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

[Ilias Lazaridis] ... > Let's see: > > The process would be: > > a) A Python Foundation official states: "of course we accept diversity > and of course we are intrested that our source-code-base compiles > directly with MinGW (and other compilers)". Well, I'm a Director of the Python Software Foun

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Robert Kern wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Robert Kern wrote: [snip] The answer to most of your questions is, "Because no one has yet volunteered their time and effort to get the job done." this answer do not fit in most questions. please review them again. Against my bette

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Horsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes Stephen Kellett wrote: Who's "Guido"? LOL Falling off my chair!! I think the expression you are looking for is ROFL! :-) Yes, but with that I could've been standing up before ending up on the floor. I wrote it as I fel

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

[Sorry, I'm to tired to read more posts today. I'll try to answer to each message adressed to me tomorrow. Thank you for your time.] - I find this thread facinating. I don't know wich of the posters in this thread belong to the python team. Nearly no one community member gives simply some answers

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes I like to synchronize any efforts with the existing ones. I assume the reason for doing that would be to avoid duplicating effort? [...] - (off-topic suggestions processing model) Your suggestions w

RE: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>> And yet there is not one company that has someone devoted full-time >>> to developing Python. Not even Guido. >> >> Who's "Guido"? > > LOL Falling off my chair!! See, the problem is t

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If it is a programming language, the requirement "using an open-source > toolchain" is a rational and valid one. It is. However, mingW has nothing to do with "using an open-sourcer toolchain". Python runs in an environment with a full, open-source too

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes And yet there is not one company that has someone devoted full-time to developing Python. Not even Guido. Who's "Guido"? LOL Falling off my chair!! I think the expression you are looking for

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes I like to synchronize any efforts with the existing ones. I assume the reason for doing that would be to avoid duplicating effort? If that is the case why do you want lots of people all to answer your questionnaire. Thats

Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler

Stephen Kellett a écrit : In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Simon Brunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:12:57 +0100, bruno modulix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why do you hate Perl and Ruby community that much ? Oh, I don't. But fair's fair - we've carried our share of the burden,

  1   2   >