On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 08:14:23PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 04:59:56PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > > um... yeah, well it is rather insulting to the developer (not a > > comment on my part as to whether its an ugly hack or not), so I'm not > > surprised he's not answering you.... > > > > maybe something more along the lines of "dear dev, it appears that to > > get foo running, I need bar to be updated to run on amd64. Here is why > > it doesn't run <instert Roberto's demo sans "ugly hack">. Can you be > > of assistance?" You know, that old ants-honey thing ;-) > > > My "ugly hack" comment was in reference to the dl module itself. I > don't blame someone for using it since it is there. However, using the > dl module is sort of anti-Python, since you lose the ability to work > with objects in the foreign function. as I said, no commentary on the use of "ugly hack" just on the past about it being passed on upstream... heh heh A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature