Author loewis
Recipients amaury.forgeotdarc, eric.araujo, jonny, loewis, rpetrov
Date 2010-12-07.19:28:21
SpamBayes Score 1.56636e-11
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <4CFE8AD4.8070902@v.loewis.de>
In-reply-to <1291705988.17.0.0770786888913.issue10615@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> - Embedding Python by just compiling/linking all the .c files in
> seems to be a major feature to me; so fixing compilation is useful
> for its own

If that's the objective of the patch, I'm -1 on it.

> - The win32 build system has never used "configure;make", but a
> Visual Studio project file; so why require it for a MinGW build?!

Well, if MingW could use the VS project files, that would be fine
with me as well... We need *some* build procedure. Just being
able to compile the source files is not maintainable.

> It would be a "nice to have". But there is one thing: The patch in
> its current form is trivial and next to impossible to break anything,
> yet I'm sure it's useful for a number of people. It's a result of
> work done within the company I'm working for. Submitting the patch
> does not have an immediate benefit for my company, it only will save
> me a (short!) amount of time because I will not to have to re-apply
> the patch for every new Python release. This time saving is the only
> justification for spending some working time to try to get it into
> the official tree.

Understood. Perhaps somebody else is interested in picking up the
patch.

BTW, you do have your employer's permission to contribute this work,
right?
History
Date User Action Args
2010-12-07 19:28:22loewissetrecipients: + loewis, amaury.forgeotdarc, eric.araujo, rpetrov, jonny
2010-12-07 19:28:21loewislinkissue10615 messages
2010-12-07 19:28:21loewiscreate