On May 21, 2010, at 01:05 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Should we start thinking about releasing 2.6.6 soonish?
>>>
>>> By tradition, it should come out soon after 2.7 and be the last bugfix
>>> (except for security patches).
>>
>> I guess what I mean is, should we have (at least) one more point
Should we start thinking about releasing 2.6.6 soonish?
By tradition, it should come out soon after 2.7 and be the last bugfix
(except for security patches).
I guess what I mean is, should we have (at least) one more point release
before the post-2.7 last-bug-fix-release?
Because it's a secu
On May 20, 2010, at 06:01 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>On 5/20/2010 5:52 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> On May 20, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds good to me, since this is (a) a security fix that will make
>>> some vendors happy, and (b) only a C-level API. I expect that some
>>>
On 5/20/2010 5:52 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On May 20, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Sounds good to me, since this is (a) a security fix that will make
some vendors happy, and (b) only a C-level API. I expect that some
apps embedding Python will use this API unconditionally and this
On May 20, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>Sounds good to me, since this is (a) a security fix that will make
>some vendors happy, and (b) only a C-level API. I expect that some
>apps embedding Python will use this API unconditionally and this break
>with earlier Python versions; this
Sounds good to me, since this is (a) a security fix that will make
some vendors happy, and (b) only a C-level API. I expect that some
apps embedding Python will use this API unconditionally and this break
with earlier Python versions; this could be intentional because of the
vulnerability (else why
