Re: [Python-Dev] Troubles to merge changes in the 2.7 branch: PR "out-of-date" branch

2018-05-29 Thread Victor Stinner
2018-05-29 22:12 GMT+02:00 Miro Hrončok : > On 29.5.2018 22:01, Victor Stinner wrote: >> >> GitHub provides a [Update branch] button. It seems like the button >> does a rebase, no? > > > AFAIK it merges the traget branch to the PR branch. No rebase. Oh right! And it's the good option :-) Rebase ca

Re: [Python-Dev] Troubles to merge changes in the 2.7 branch: PR "out-of-date" branch

2018-05-29 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 29.5.2018 22:01, Victor Stinner wrote: GitHub provides a [Update branch] button. It seems like the button does a rebase, no? AFAIK it merges the traget branch to the PR branch. No rebase. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ P

Re: [Python-Dev] Troubles to merge changes in the 2.7 branch: PR "out-of-date" branch

2018-05-29 Thread Victor Stinner
GitHub provides a [Update branch] button. It seems like the button does a rebase, no? Victor 2018-05-29 18:24 GMT+02:00 Matthias Bussonnier : > On Tue, 29 May 2018 at 08:43, Paul G wrote: >> >> This doesn't seem like the best idea, since it would kick off dozens or >> hundreds of builds for ever

Re: [Python-Dev] Troubles to merge changes in the 2.7 branch: PR "out-of-date" branch

2018-05-29 Thread Matthias Bussonnier
On Tue, 29 May 2018 at 08:43, Paul G wrote: > This doesn't seem like the best idea, since it would kick off dozens or > hundreds of builds for every commit to the master branch. > Sorry if I was unclear, I was not suggesting to do that for PRs against master, but do that only for 2.7, 3.4 and 3.

[Python-Dev] Python 3.7.0 updated schedule: beta 5 cutoff in 24 hours

2018-05-29 Thread Ned Deily
Here's an update on the 3.7.0 endgame. As announced several days ago, we made the difficult decision to hold back on 3.7.0rc1 due primarily to some unexpected difficulties being seen downstream due to changes in how docstrings were handled in 3.7.0 (details below). After some discussions about vari

Re: [Python-Dev] Troubles to merge changes in the 2.7 branch: PR "out-of-date" branch

2018-05-29 Thread Paul G
This doesn't seem like the best idea, since it would kick off dozens or hundreds of builds for every commit to the master branch. On 05/29/2018 11:25 AM, Matthias Bussonnier wrote: >> As I wrote, it became very difficult to merge any PR on 2.7 because of >> that. We all run a race to be the first

Re: [Python-Dev] Troubles to merge changes in the 2.7 branch: PR "out-of-date" branch

2018-05-29 Thread Matthias Bussonnier
> As I wrote, it became very difficult to merge any PR on 2.7 because of > that. We all run a race to be the first one to merge a change into > 2.7. The next one will get a "conflict" even if the merged commit is > unrelated (as I described: two different unrelated directories). Couldn't miss-isli

Re: [Python-Dev] Compact GC Header

2018-05-29 Thread Steve Dower
Looks like it breaks the 3.7 ABI, which is certainly not allowed at this time. But it’s not a limited API structure, so no problem for 3.8. Top-posted from my Windows 10 phone From: Victor Stinner Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 6:44 To: INADA Naoki Cc: Python-Dev Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Compact G

Re: [Python-Dev] Compact GC Header

2018-05-29 Thread Victor Stinner
> I hacked GC module and managed to slim PyGC_Head down from 3 words to 2 > words. > It passes test suite, while some comments and code cleanup is needed before > merge. Does this change break the stable ABI? Victor ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-De

[Python-Dev] Compact GC Header

2018-05-29 Thread INADA Naoki
Hi, all. I hacked GC module and managed to slim PyGC_Head down from 3 words to 2 words. It passes test suite, while some comments and code cleanup is needed before merge. * https://bugs.python.org/issue33597 * https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/7043 I want to merge it after 3.7.0rc1 and buil

Re: [Python-Dev] Troubles to merge changes in the 2.7 branch: PR "out-of-date" branch

2018-05-29 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 29 May 2018 at 08:52, Ned Deily wrote: > On May 28, 2018, at 17:42, Victor Stinner wrote: > > Please use the same configuration for 2.7, 3.6, 3.7 and master branches! > > Sounds reasonable. I've updated the 2.7 configuration to match the others > and not require the PR branch be up to date be