From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christoph Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Current state of python.el in the Emacs trunk Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 20:05:07 -0700 Message-ID: <86r5b8llwc.fsf@gmail.com> References: <4D40F55C.2040400@gmail.com> <874o85t61z.fsf@liv.ac.uk> <87y65hukcj.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1297825545 12182 80.91.229.12 (16 Feb 2011 03:05:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:05:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , Dave Love , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 16 04:05:38 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PpXhv-00084A-Jv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 04:05:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43899 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PpXhu-0000RA-6A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:05:34 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45141 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PpXhp-0000R5-86 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:05:30 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PpXho-0001Ra-1X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:05:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:51474) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PpXhm-0001RI-It; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:05:26 -0500 Original-Received: by iwc10 with SMTP id 10so904357iwc.0 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 19:05:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; bh=zrs2J7yNR0SZktTrX7Ik3PaciyEfiZJ0yuPxtmgIR1U=; b=xD2M504zLleDM+NscdA0yVQ/WtmGRbWeXJhnn7TgKIBwabQYh/iQp7Z0qdgLpgutt2 foPUTAgx3dVwWkeIbV/cfkyjhcR5qlgrXMElm4xddTG1tZ36tKR82Sw1Vyqsi+09rOYp UCZ5ume8zCzgKTf0G2B6P6kPpBsZ8cBcXhXkg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type; b=ZLVFAHUq7rKR8RrUC/EKkJU4ynAr5AliR8h2E5JYhtpxoS5nghKA02j5tEv5skTZKQ LzVMLE0d3A8Opf4iaWuZ8RMjjketSNrPUGl7dONaxiACJxmSYKELDRZ0NH890zWPvsmx 2O1/Tpa/Cl98TeN3RHfkI4KPA2XPP2KI0gpfA= Original-Received: by 10.42.241.70 with SMTP id ld6mr78811icb.124.1297825525325; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 19:05:25 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (71-208-192-11.hlrn.qwest.net [71.208.192.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y8sm3641240ica.14.2011.02.15.19.05.11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 15 Feb 2011 19:05:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:33:46 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (windows-nt) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.214.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:136087 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > The only problem is that the very reason for desiring such a switch is > because nobody (including and especially the most obvious candidate, > Dave) has been willing to maintain our python.el. I'm confused. Didn't I offer to do maintenance work, like for example integrating Dave's bug fixes (if he agreed to it)? I have actually spent quite some time digging through the current python.el mode and tried to do some clean up and fix things. For example, the inital integration of pdbtrack a couple of years ago left a huge amount of duplication since it was never really cleaned up. For example: why are there two different ways to invoke a python shell? > Now Fabian proposes a third Python mode. I looked at it and I like it. It actually fixes some issues that the current python.el has, especially when it comes to things like pdbtrack. I had some issues getting some of features to work (shell completion, for example) but that might just be because I was using 24.0.50 and/or using it wrong. I didn't have the time to compare the current python.el with Fabian's version as far as features go, but I didn't really miss anything while using Fabian's new mode today. > Of course, I'd rather work at bringing the various python modes closer > to each other, rather than have them fork even further, so I'm not sure > what's the best course here. As far as python-mode.el goes...the discussion I started on this list sparked another on the python-mode list: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-mode/2011-February/000937.html This doesn't sound like we would get on the same page anytime soon. Christoph