On 05/27/2015 10:35 PM, Larry Hastings wrote:
Well, certainly this sounds like something that needs to go into the
regression test suite. Can someone create the issue?
... and the patch?
NM, the existing fix already added a test to the regression test suite.
I should have read the issue fi
On 05/27/2015 08:02 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 28 May 2015 at 12:51, Ned Batchelder wrote:
This issue has been fixed, but a day or two late for 3.5b1.
Aye, we only found out about the missing test case via feedback *on*
the beta. We had never needed to worry about it before, but it turns
out a
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> On 28 May 2015 at 14:30, Larry Hastings wrote:
> > On 05/27/2015 07:51 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> >
> > This issue has been fixed, but a day or two late for 3.5b1. It prevents
> > loading the coverage.py extension. It'd be great to get a
On 28 May 2015 at 14:30, Larry Hastings wrote:
> On 05/27/2015 07:51 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>
> This issue has been fixed, but a day or two late for 3.5b1. It prevents
> loading the coverage.py extension. It'd be great to get a new beta release
> soon. :)
>
>
> http://legacy.python.org/dev/pe
On 05/27/2015 07:51 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
This issue has been fixed, but a day or two late for 3.5b1. It
prevents loading the coverage.py extension. It'd be great to get a
new beta release soon. :)
http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0478/
//arry/
Nick Coghlan schrieb am 28.05.2015 um 05:02:
> On 28 May 2015 at 12:51, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>> This issue has been fixed, but a day or two late for 3.5b1.
>
> Aye, we only found out about the missing test case via feedback *on*
> the beta. We had never needed to worry about it before, but it tur
On 2015-05-27 11:02 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>It prevents
>loading the coverage.py extension. It'd be great to get a new beta release
>soon. :)
Until your email, I hadn't fully thought through the consequences, but
the bug is actually going to block a*lot* of potential testing of the
beta relea
On 28 May 2015 at 12:51, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> This issue has been fixed, but a day or two late for 3.5b1.
Aye, we only found out about the missing test case via feedback *on*
the beta. We had never needed to worry about it before, but it turns
out all our extension modules in the standard libr
This issue has been fixed, but a day or two late for 3.5b1. It prevents
loading the coverage.py extension. It'd be great to get a new beta
release soon. :)
--Ned.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/list
