Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:56 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It looks to me like the main thing that Pybots needs is help with > maintenance. Getting someone to set up an individual buildbot is one thing, > but keeping it working is the important bit and it looks like people are not > doing that

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 6 Jul, 09:09 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 8:46 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's one thing to tell people that they need to be helping out (and I'm sure you're right) but it's much more useful to get the message out that "we really need people to do X, Y, and Z".

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 6 Jul, 05:29 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (I'd also like to improve the labels of the build slaves. What exactly is "x86 Red Hat 9 trunk" testing? Trunk of what? What project?) It seems like you would like to edit the master configuration file. That can be arranged fairly easily. How s

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Grig Gheorghiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'll send a message to the pybots mailing list asking people whose > buildbots are turned off if they're still interested in running them. > Negative or no answers will mean we can remove them from the farm. > OK, I poste

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> It's not only a question of changing a static label in this case. A > given buildslave can run the tests for multiple projects, in which > case it becomes tricky to change the label on the fly accordingly. I think you could set up different builders for a single slave in that case (use a slave l

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 8:46 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > However, let's say that this were tremendously successful, and lots of > people start paying attention. I think pybots.org needs to be updated to > say exactly what a participant interested in python testing needs to do, > beyond "her

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> (I'd also like to improve the labels of the build slaves. What exactly > is "x86 Red Hat 9 trunk" testing? Trunk of what? What project?) It seems like you would like to edit the master configuration file. That can be arranged fairly easily. Regards, Martin ___

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > On 01:02 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >To bring my $0.02 to this discussion: the Pybots 'community buildbots' > >turned out largely to be a failure. > > Let's not say it's a failure. Let's instead say that it hasn't yet > become a success :-). +1 > >I still

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 01:02 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To bring my $0.02 to this discussion: the Pybots 'community buildbots' turned out largely to be a failure. Let's not say it's a failure. Let's instead say that it hasn't yet become a success :-). I still haven't given up, and I hope this thread will spur

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 8:18 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Today on planetpython.org, Doug Hellman announced the June issue of Python > magazine. The cover story this month is about Pybots, "the fantastic > automation system that has been put in place to make sure new releases of > Python soft

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

Guido van Rossum wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So you're saying py.test needs to be fixed? Fine with me, but then I don't understand why you bothered bringing it up her

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:33 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK, fair enough. Taking a step back, I was pushing this really hard because > to *me*, it seems like dealing with the influx of bug reports after the fact > is an unreasonable amount of additional work, whereas immediate reverts are >

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> So you're saying py.test needs to be fixed? Fine with me, but then I >> don't understand why you bothered bringing it up here instead of >> f

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do tend to ramble on, so here's an executive summary of my response: I want python developers to pay attention to the community buildbots and to treat breakages of existing projects as a serious issue. Counter-proposal: * Interested developers or users of the majo

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 26 Jun, 09:24 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:06 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 07:44 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, sorry, that's life. We're not going to deal with breakage in 3rd party code on a "drop all other work" basis. For the record, "automatic rev

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 09:17 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:35 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Because the relevant community buildbot turned red with that revision of trunk. Keep in mind I'm not talking about every piece of Python code in the universe; just the ones selected for the c

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jun 26, 2008, at 5:54 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I just added a "deferred blocker" priority -- that implements one half of your wish. Mass issue updating must be done by someone who knows Roundup better than me, I'm afraid. I doubt true mass

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So you're saying py.test needs to be fixed? Fine with me, but then I > don't understand why you bothered bringing it up here instead of > fixing it (or reporting to the py.test maintainers, I don't know if > you're one

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> I just added a "deferred blocker" priority -- that implements one half > of your wish. Mass issue updating must be done by someone who knows > Roundup better than me, I'm afraid. I doubt true mass update will be necessary. If you remind me that I should convert all "deferred blocker" issues to s

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jun 26, 2008, at 5:20 PM, Georg Brandl wrote: Barry Warsaw schrieb: I don't know if this "Barry" guy has the appropriate permissions on the bugtracker to increase priorities, so I've taken the liberty of upgrading it as a release blocker f

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:06 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 07:44 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> At no time will a policy "the community buildbots must be green" be >> useful: the tests that run on these buildbots are not under our control, >> so if the tests test things we deem non-publi

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

Barry Warsaw schrieb: I don't know if this "Barry" guy has the appropriate permissions on the bugtracker to increase priorities, so I've taken the liberty of upgrading it as a release blocker for the _second_ beta ... ;-). So, at least there's been one productive consequence of this disc

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:35 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 05:14 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> >>> I don't know. JP is already addressing the issues affecting Twisted in >>> another thread (incompatible changes in the private-but-necessary-to- >>> get-any-testing-done API of the warni

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jun 26, 2008, at 12:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 04:42 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: an explanation about *why* Django cannot even be imported than a blanket com

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jun 26, 2008, at 11:42 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: If the community buildbots aren't largely green by the time beta 2 comes out, that's when I'll agree we have a problem - they should definitely be green by the time first release candidate comes o

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

Terry Reedy schrieb: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: to what extent should Python actually be compatible between releases? As I understand things from years of observation, the following are fair game to changed in ways possibly backward-incompatible for specific code: bugs, detailed float behavi

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: On 07:44 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At no time will a policy "the community buildbots must be green" be useful: the tests that run on these buildbots are not under our control, so if the tests test things we deem non-public we can't do anything about it. (And we ma

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> I don't ascribe this to malice - > it really *would* be much harder to fix it now, for us as well as for him. I think I disagree. It's easier to fix it now than it was to fix it back then. Fixing it back then would have meant to constantly observe the buildbots, and keep them running, so it woul

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 07:44 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At no time will a policy "the community buildbots must be green" be useful: the tests that run on these buildbots are not under our control, so if the tests test things we deem non-public we can't do anything about it. (And we may have a hard time convincin

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> BuildBot has two ways to let you run your code on all builders before you > commit it to trunk. You can force a build on a branch or you can try a > build with a patch. I don't know if these options are enabled on Python's > buildmaster. If they are, then if you want, you can use them to make

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

Georg Brandl wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Another way to phrase this question is, "whose responsibility is it to make Python 2.5 programs run on Python 2.6"? Or, "what happens when the core team finds out that a change they have made has broken some python software 'in the wild'"? Her

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: to what extent should Python actually be compatible between releases? As I understand things from years of observation, the following are fair game to changed in ways possibly backward-incompatible for specific code: bugs, detailed float behavior (which may be syst

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> I want python developers to pay attention to the community buildbots I don't think that goal is realistic. Instead, somebody who has actual interest in this matter should pay this attention, and then bring it up on python-dev when something breaks. Regards, Martin __

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:46:48 +0200, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] As for reverting changes that break, I'd support this only for changes that break *all* of them. For example, I only use one platform to develop on (and I guess it's the same for many others), having the buildbots

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

To me (and I'm an outsider not a direct developer), it's Python developers responsibility to handle the Python problems and the Python build bots. The community build bots are the responsibility of their authors. If JP is handling the Twisted one then great. It's got a gatekeeper. If no one is hand

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: On 03:42 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: beta 1 has some trouble running *our* test suite - I'd be fairly surprised if the community buildbots were in significantly better shape. That's another problem, yes :) The community buildbots have b

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Another way to phrase this question is, "whose responsibility is it to make Python 2.5 programs run on Python 2.6"? Or, "what happens when the core team finds out that a change they have made has broken some python software 'in the wild'"? Here are a couple of way

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 05:14 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know. JP is already addressing the issues affecting Twisted in another thread (incompatible changes in the private-but-necessary-to- get-any-testing-done API of the warnings module). But I really think that whoever made the change which broke it s

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

I do tend to ramble on, so here's an executive summary of my response: I want python developers to pay attention to the community buildbots and to treat breakages of existing projects as a serious issue. However, I don't think that maintaining those projects is the core team's job, so all I'

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> this patch even make things worse for me. now py.test also dies.

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> this patch even make things worse for me. now py.test also dies. > > Please add details to the tracker. > Well, I think most probably the patc

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > this patch even make things worse for me. now py.test also dies. Please add details to the tracker. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 6:54 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 04:42 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>> an explanation about *why* Django cannot even be imported than a >>> blanket complaint that this is a di

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> A big part of why I wrote this message is that I wanted a clear > understanding of the relationship between the definition of "alpha", > "beta" and "RC" and the state of various buildbots. If that > relationship exists already, just linking to it from > http://python.org/download/releases/2.6/

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

> That's also why the alpha is called an alpha. My informal understanding > is that a beta should have no (or at least very few) known issues No, that's not the purpose. Instead, it is a promise that no further features will be added, i.e. that the code is stable from a feature point of view. It

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

And just to make my position perfectly clear, I've unassigned it, since I don't foresee to be able to give this issue the quality time it clearly needs. Mind you, I agree it's a release blocker. But I don't have time to personally investigate it. Sorry. On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:54 AM, <[EMAIL PR

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:21 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 03:33 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> It needs to be decided case-by-case. > > If certain tests are to be ignored on a case-by-case basis, why not record > that decision by disabling the test in the code? Otherwise, the decision > i

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 04:42 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: an explanation about *why* Django cannot even be imported than a blanket complaint that this is a disgrace. So why is it? and already discussed: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

Ralf Schmitt wrote: TypeError: unhashable type: 'ManyToManyField' TypeError: unhashable type: 'PrimaryKeyConstraint' and already discussed: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-April/078421.html Following the discussion to it's conclusions leads one to a tracker issue [1] that was

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > an explanation about *why* Django cannot even be imported than a > blanket complaint that this is a disgrace. So why is it? > File "/home/ralf/pediapress/appserver/django/db/models/options.py", line 198, in _many_to

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 03:42 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: beta 1 has some trouble running *our* test suite - I'd be fairly surprised if the community buildbots were in significantly better shape. That's another problem, yes :) The community buildbots have been in a broken state for mo

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

On 03:33 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Too verbose, Glyph. :-) Mea culpa. "Glyph" might be a less appropriate moniker than "Altogether too many glyphs". It needs to be decided case-by-case. If certain tests are to be ignored on a case-by-case basis, why not record that decision by disablin

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Today on planetpython.org, Doug Hellman announced the June issue of Python magazine. The cover story this month is about Pybots, "the fantastic automation system that has been put in place to make sure new releases of Python software are as robust and stable as possibl

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

Too verbose, Glyph. :-) It needs to be decided case-by-case. The beta is called beta because, well, it may break stuff and we may want to fix it. But there are also likely many frameworks that use undefined behavior. I'm not particularly impressed by statistics like "all tests are red" -- this may

[Python-Dev] Community buildbots and Python release quality metrics

Today on planetpython.org, Doug Hellman announced the June issue of Python magazine. The cover story this month is about Pybots, "the fantastic automation system that has been put in place to make sure new releases of Python software are as robust and stable as possible". Last week, there was

[Python-Dev] Community buildbots

Hi, I just wanted to point out a few things: Community 2.5 bots, 6 out of 8 offline, of the remaining two (which are both red), one is actually using Python 2.6, not Python 2.5: http://python.org/dev/buildbot/community/2.5/ Community 2.6 bots, 6 out of 8 offline, but at least the remaining tw

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

On 7/25/06, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If you want I can send you the build master cfg I setup on python.organd some simple instructions for how to connect to it.  I don't havetime to focus on this at the moment and probably won't until 2.5 isout.n--Sure. I'm still a bit unclear on wh

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

If you want I can send you the build master cfg I setup on python.org and some simple instructions for how to connect to it. I don't have time to focus on this at the moment and probably won't until 2.5 is out. n -- On 7/20/06, Grig Gheorghiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > This message is

[Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

Hi, This message is in response to Glyph's plea (). Here's what Glyph said: "I would like to propose, although I certainly don't have time to implement, a program by which Python-using projects could contribute buildslaves which

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

On 7/22/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Grig Gheorghiu wrote:> As I said earlier: If you need some kind of post-commit> trigger on the python repository to trigger a build, just> let me know. We currently use a more-or-less plain > svn_buildbot.py to trigger our own

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

Grig Gheorghiu wrote: > As I said earlier: If you need some kind of post-commit > trigger on the python repository to trigger a build, just > let me know. We currently use a more-or-less plain > svn_buildbot.py to trigger our own builds. > > Wouldn't that put too much of a burden o

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

On 7/22/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Grig Gheorghiu wrote:> Please let me know if you're interested.As I said earlier: If you need some kind of post-committrigger on the python repository to trigger a build, justlet me know. We currently use a more-or-less plain svn_buildbot.py

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

Grig Gheorghiu wrote: > Please let me know if you're interested. As I said earlier: If you need some kind of post-commit trigger on the python repository to trigger a build, just let me know. We currently use a more-or-less plain svn_buildbot.py to trigger our own builds. Regards, Martin

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

I have a server up and running. I still need to polish some stuff off. I will mail more info when I get a chance. n -- On 7/21/06, Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:04:38 -0700, Grig Gheorghiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Apart from the goals st

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:04:38 -0700, Grig Gheorghiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi, > >Apart from the goals stated by Glyph, I see this as a very valuable >effort in convincing people of the value of automated tests, >Python-related or not. A secondary effect I'd like to see would be for >these suit

[Python-Dev] Community buildbots -- reprise

Hi,This message is in response to Glyph's plea( ).Here's what Glyph said:"I would like to propose, although I certainly don't have time toimplement, a program by which Python-using projects could contributebuildslaves which would ru

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On Monday 17 July 2006 20:27, Andrew MacIntyre wrote: > On the face of it, it seems to me that branching a new major > release at the 1st beta would be one way of managing this. The > trunk is not frozen for an extended period, and any "features" and > bug fixes could probably be backported from t

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

Anthony Baxter wrote: > On Friday 14 July 2006 22:45, Jeremy Hylton wrote: >> Maybe the basic question is right, but the emphasis needs to be >> changed. If we had a rule that said the final release was 90 days >> after the last submission that wasn't to fix a regression, we'd ask >> "Is this feat

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On Friday 14 July 2006 22:45, Jeremy Hylton wrote: > Maybe the basic question is right, but the emphasis needs to be > changed. If we had a rule that said the final release was 90 days > after the last submission that wasn't to fix a regression, we'd ask > "Is this feature important enough to warr

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 00:13:35 -0400, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Other developers do the same. Periodically (once a week?), when PAT is > ^ >

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

[Neal Norwitz] > ... > That leaves 1 unexplained failure on a Windows bot. It wasn't my Windows bot, but I believe test_profile has failed (rarely) on several of the bots, and in the same (or very similar) way. Note that the failure went away on the Windows bot in question the next time the tests

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On 7/15/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry Reedy wrote: > > That is the goal, but when I watched the buildbot results last spring, the > > degree of stability (greenness) appeared to vary. Is it possible to tag > > particular versions as a 'green' version, or the 'most recent

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > A module with the given __future__ import could be written to expect that > literals are unicode instances instead of str, and encode them appropriately > when passing to modules that expect str. Such changes might have to be reverted in Python 3, since the module might

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

James Y Knight wrote: > On Jul 15, 2006, at 3:15 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >> Note that it also helps setting the default encoding >> to 'unknown'. That way you disable the coercion of strings >> to Unicode and all the places where this implicit conversion >> takes place crop up, allowing you to tak

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

On Jul 15, 2006, at 3:15 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > Note that it also helps setting the default encoding > to 'unknown'. That way you disable the coercion of strings > to Unicode and all the places where this implicit conversion > takes place crop up, allowing you to take proper action (i.e. > expl

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 14:35:08 +1000, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> A __future__ import would allow these behaviors to be upgraded module-by- >>> module. >> No it wouldn't. > > Yes it would! :) > >> __future__ works solely on the

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 10:43:22 +0200, "\"Martin v. Löwis\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >People can use [-U] to improve the Unicode support in the Python standard >library. When they find that something doesn't work, they can study the >problem, and ponder possible solutions. Then, they can contribu

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 14:35:08 +1000, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>A __future__ import would allow these behaviors to be upgraded module-by- >>module. > >No it wouldn't. Yes it would! :) >__future__ works solely on the semantics of different pieces of syntax,

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 00:13:35 -0400, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Is the following something like what you are suggesting? Something like it, but... >A Python Application Testing (PAT) machine is set up with buildbot and any >needed custom scripts. Sometime after that and after 2.5

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

On Thu, Jul 13, 2006, Talin wrote: > > Actually - can we make new-style classes the default, but allow a > way to switch to old-style classes if needed? Perhaps a command-line > argument to set the default back to old-style? Nope. Python 3.0 will have new-style classes as the default, but there w

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: >> Are you aware of http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/ ? > > Yes. And it does not seem to be open for all Ah, ok. It indeed isn't open for anonymous participation; the test results are open for all, though. > >> We are not just talking about buildbots here

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On 7/15/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you aware of http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/ ? Yes. And it does not seem to be open for all, but then again, any documentation with regard to it seems to be very sparse or hidden so I can very well be wrong here. Ah, hidden away on

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> python -U is a failure for obvious reasons and a >>> __future__ import is clearly better. >> I disagree. > > I am surprised that you do, since I thought that Chris's conclusion was > pretty obvious. Python -U doesn't work, even on the standard library. Sure, it does

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: > This is what Xenofarm for Pike has done for a long time now. See for > example: http://pike.ida.liu.se/development/pikefarm/7.7.xml > > This is also what Bitten (http://bitten.cmlenz.net/) has implemented > for Trac (which is one of the bug/incident trackers

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

Terry Reedy wrote: > That is the goal, but when I watched the buildbot results last spring, the > degree of stability (greenness) appeared to vary. Is it possible to tag > particular versions as a 'green' version, or the 'most recent green > version' worth playing with? Don't get confused by t

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On 7/14/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The "community buildbot" idea is a good one, although it should just > be possible to write something for buildbot that checks out and > builds the latest Python SVN, then installs it to a temporary > location, then adds that location to the f

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > A __future__ import would allow these behaviors to be upgraded > module-by-module. No it wouldn't. __future__ works solely on the semantics of different pieces of syntax, because any syntax changes are purely local to the current module. This doesn't work for datatyp

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:27:56 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>The buildbot idea sounds excellent. > > Thanks. If someone can set this up, it pretty much addresses my > concerns. > ... > I am aware of when new releases come out :).

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 23:38:52 +0200, "\"Martin v. Löwis\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Christopher Armstrong wrote: >> python -U is a failure for obvious reasons and a >> __future__ import is clearly better. > >I disagree. I am surprised that you do, since I thought that Chris's conclusion was pr

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

"A.M. Kuchling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.python.org/dev/tools/, in a discussion of checkin policies, > does say: > > The Python source tree is managed for stability, meaning that > if you make a checkout at a random point in time the tree will almos

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

Christopher Armstrong wrote: > I'm at least willing to set up the buildbots for projects I care about > (Twisted, pydoctor, whatever), and perhaps help out with the setting > up the buildmaster. If you need trigger calls from subversion's post-commit hooks, please let me know, and I can set them u

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots

Christopher Armstrong wrote: > python -U is a failure for obvious reasons and a > __future__ import is clearly better. I disagree. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsub

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On 7/14/06, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 01:37:28PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > (add PEP announcements and python-dev summary items to the mix, and you > > have a high-quality development blog generated entirely from existing > > content) > > (hmm. maybe

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:39:06 -0700, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On 7/13/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> a longer beta period gives *external* developers more time to catch up, >> and results in less work for the end users. >This is the part I don't get. For the exter

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 06:46:55 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Neal> How often is the python build broken or otherwise unusable? > >Not very often. I have to agree. The effort I'm talking about is not in fixing large numbers of problems, but simply gearing up to properly test to see if there

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

Jeremy Hylton wrote: >> When the slave suffers a real failure due to a backwards >> incompatibility, it >> will take a developer of the application to figure out what it was >> that broke >> the application's tests. >> >> So while I think it's a great idea, I also think it will need significant >

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 01:37:28PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > (add PEP announcements and python-dev summary items to the mix, and you > have a high-quality development blog generated entirely from existing content) > (hmm. maybe this could be put together by a robot? time to start hacking on >

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Greg> Maybe there could be an "unstable" release phase that lasts > for a Greg> whole release cycle. So you'd first release version > 2.n as Greg> "unstable", and keep 2.(n-1) as the current "stable" > release. Then Greg> when 2.(n+1) is ready, 2.n would

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On 7/14/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anthony Baxter wrote: > > On Friday 14 July 2006 16:39, Neal Norwitz wrote: > >> Remember I also tried to push for more features to go in early? > >> That would have given more time for external testing. Still > >> features are coming in. Pyth

Re: [Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)

On 7/14/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 14 July 2006 16:39, Neal Norwitz wrote: > > Remember I also tried to push for more features to go in early? > > That would have given more time for external testing. Still > > features are coming in. Python developers weren't happy

  1   2   >