[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Changes by Eli Bendersky : -- status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mai

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Éric Araujo added the comment: Unassigning; I have to use my Python time for distutils bugs, or doc bugs for modules I actually like (I’m no fan of XML nor DOM :). I would politely insist that doc fixes have to get backported to 2.7 unless it would be really bothersome (like a big change to

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Eli Bendersky added the comment: There was a patch for the docs (+ other stuff) in issue #7635 as well. It can be integrated, if relevant. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Éric Araujo added the comment: I understand :) I’ll do it. I value doc as much as code, it’s also delivered faster to the users, and there are a lot of Python 2 users out there, so porting doc fixes to 2.7 is really worth it. -- assignee: docs@python -> eric.araujo status: closed ->

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Eli Bendersky added the comment: Éric, thanks for the comments - all fixed. As for 2.7, it's just laziness really. Committing to both 3.2 and 3.3 is trivial since it's a simple merge. For 2.7 it's more complicated since it's an unrelated branch, and the code samples have to be fixed as well (

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 1a740ea4f2a1 by Eli Bendersky in branch '3.2': Issue #14202: some additional doc fixes http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1a740ea4f2a1 New changeset b2e27f21760e by Eli Bendersky in branch 'default': Issue #14202: some additional doc fixes http://hg.

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Éric Araujo added the comment: Thanks to you both, the new docs are greatly better! Eli, why not backporting to 2.7 too? It has the same rules and should get the same attention as 3.2. BTW, when you nest class/method directives, you needn’t repeat the class name in the method directives:

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Eli Bendersky added the comment: I committed the patch after some minor modifications, to 3.2 and 3.3 Florian, thanks for the contribution! -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> committed/rejected status: open -> closed versions: +Python 3.2 -Python 2.7 _

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 172630a3e6d8 by Eli Bendersky in branch '3.2': Issue #14202: Greatly enhance the documentation of xml.dom.pulldom. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/172630a3e6d8 New changeset 5d118a154ba3 by Eli Bendersky in branch 'default': Issue #14202: Greatly

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Changes by Florian Mladitsch : -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file24885/xml.dom.pulldom.rst.patch ___ Python tracker ___ _

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Eli Bendersky added the comment: Looks good, pending fixing of Éric's comments. Florian, could you do that? We can then proceed to commit (to 3.3) and consider backports. -- stage: needs patch -> patch review ___ Python tracker

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Éric Araujo added the comment: Ah, right, I just assumed that your .rst file was the full file (like in your first upload), but it is indeed a diff. Our tools don’t care about the file extension, but they sometimes are useful conventions for humans :) --

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Florian Mladitsch added the comment: It is a diff-file, or am I missing something? I generated the file with 'hg diff > xml.dom.pulldom.rst' Probably should have given it a '*.patch' file-ending =/ -- ___ Python tracker

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Éric Araujo added the comment: Could you provide a diff? (instructions in the devguide) -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-li

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Changes by Florian Mladitsch : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file24879/xml.dom.pulldom.rst ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list ma

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Eli Bendersky added the comment: I reviewed the patch in http://bugs.python.org/review/14202/show -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Pytho

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Éric Araujo added the comment: Merged Florian’s version with the original file to create a patch. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file24752/pulldom-documentation.rst ___ Python tracker __

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Eli Bendersky added the comment: Thanks, Florian - I will review the patch. At first sight it looks much better than what exists. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

Florian M added the comment: I wrote some documentation with the information I found on http://wiki.python.org/moin/PullDom and some custom examples. -- nosy: +flomm Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file24750/xml.dom.pulldom.rst ___ Python tracker

[issue14202] The docs of xml.dom.pulldom are almost nonexistent

New submission from Eli Bendersky : http://docs.python.org/dev/library/xml.dom.pulldom.html "embarrassing" is the word I wanted to use, but it's too strong for the title ;-) Seriously, this module is part of the stdlib, it should at least have *some* documentation. -- assignee: docs@