On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 08:44:06 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 23:24:52 +, Colin Watson wrote:
>>In any case, there is really very little point in tilting at this
>>windmill now
>
>Don Quixote doesn't need to worry about thinking about something
>idiotic, since actually it's Sanch
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 21:22:34 +, Robie Basak wrote:
>Assuming we do ship Python 2 in main in 18.04, which seems likely, you
>will be able to use Python 2 in 18.04 until 2023.
It's quite possible that Arch Linux (I mentioned it by a previous
reply) might move python2 back to the Arch User Reposit
Robie Basak schreef op 08-12-2017 22:22:
Because Python 2 will be unsupported upstream and we don't have an
unlimited amount of resources to maintain it in Ubuntu without
upstream.
The more time we spend on maintaining duplicate stuff in the archive,
the less time we have to spend on other thi
hi,
Am Samstag, den 09.12.2017, 11:38 +0100 schrieb Xen:
>
>
> The Ubuntu CoC states to assume good intentions on behalf of the
> other.
and you are aware that this applies to both sides of the conversation,
right ?
ciao
oli
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed messag
Colin Watson schreef op 09-12-2017 0:24:
there are good reasons behind many of the changes in Python 3
You know, an appeal to "good reasons" is really a blanket statement that
betrays the absence of any good reasons.
So you go on to detail the similarities with C but with C there never
was
On 9 December 2017 at 11:47, Xen wrote:
> Colin Watson schreef op 09-12-2017 0:24:
>
>> there are good reasons behind many of the changes in Python 3
>
>
> You know, an appeal to "good reasons" is really a blanket statement that
> betrays the absence of any good reasons.
>
> So you go on to detail
On Sat, Dec 09, 2017 at 12:47:28PM +0100, Xen wrote:
> Colin Watson schreef op 09-12-2017 0:24:
> > there are good reasons behind many of the changes in Python 3
>
> You know, an appeal to "good reasons" is really a blanket statement that
> betrays the absence of any good reasons.
No, it betrays
Ralf Mardorf schreef op 09-12-2017 9:19:
PS: Don't get me wrong Xen, I get your point and without doubts you are
"Kohlhaas", as I'm, too.
I am pretty sure that if the upstream devs would have taken a more
considerate approach, businesses would actually have been willing to
fund security main
On Sat, 09 Dec 2017 14:31:12 +0100, Xen wrote:
>I am pretty sure that if the upstream devs would have taken a more
>considerate approach, businesses would actually have been willing to
>fund security maintenance, since it would have cost them much less
>than making the transition.
See
https://li
On Sat, 09 Dec 2017 14:31:12 +0100, Xen wrote:
>I think Kohlhaas was actually pretty sympathetic ;-).
Indeed, but don't confuse the way of Kohlhaas, with the way of the
worrier, as described by the Hagakure,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagakure ;).
You sometimes sound like somebody doing a soft
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 22:17:09 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>I didn't read the complete Hagakure, not because I suffer from
>dyslexia, but because the content of the Hagakure was much too idiotic
^^^
an
11 matches
Mail list logo
