-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I realized that the previous schedule really called for a release
today 7/15 because I'm a bit busy tomorrow night. In any event, let's
try to stick to doing it on 7/16.
- -Barry
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iQ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 15, 2008, at 2:38 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 5:32 AM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
A reminder: the second betas of Python 2.6 and 3.0 are schedule for
to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
But 3139 appears important enough to hold up beta 2.
http://bugs.python.org/issue3139
bytearrays are not thread safe
Can we get this fixed by tomorrow? Does anybody disagree that we
should hold up the release for this one? We don't have much tim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 15, 2008, at 8:32 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
If there is anything you need a decision on, please follow up to
this thread. I'm inundated with email so I can't watch every thread
on the mailing lists. Or ping me on #python-dev.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
We have green buildbots, yay! Thanks everyone for that.
However, we still have three release blocker issues that I am not
comfortable deferring.
3088 test_multiprocessing hangs intermittently on POSIX platforms
3375 _multiprocessing.so build pro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 17, 2008, at 09:57 AM, Steve Holden wrote:
>Barry Warsaw wrote:
>[...]
>>
>> I'll note that I plan to hold the beta3 releases until all release
>> blocker and deferred blockers are resolved.
>>
>Ian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please, no checkins on the 3.0 or 2.6 branches until further notice.
We're a go with the releases tonight. Email is not the quickest way
to get my attention. For that, use irc on freenode, #python-dev.
- -Barry
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 17, 2008, at 10:37 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
bsddb is in a very bad shape, as the 2.6 code hasn't been merged
in
/releases/3.0/
See PEP 361 for release schedule details:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0361/
Enjoy,
- -Barry
Barry Warsaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager
(on behalf of the entire python-dev team)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The releases have been made, so both the 3.0 branch and the trunk
(2.6) are now open for commits. Remember, there's only one more
planned beta, and we /really/ want to try to hit the October 1st
deadline. Let's do everything we can to stabiliz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 18, 2008, at 2:32 PM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
We can obviously drop the module for 3.0. For 2.x, should we just
shrug and disable most of the BerkeleyDB tests (maybe just on Windows)
by adding a new resource to enable them? If we're stuck with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 19, 2008, at 11:01 PM, Charles Hixson wrote:
Python-2.6b2.tar.bz missing sig file on web site. That's about all
the info I
have, except that the tgz is also missing the sig file, and that
3.0b2 has
it's sig file.
Hope this is the correc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 20, 2008, at 3:44 AM, Barry Scott wrote:
I think you mean july.
Thanks, I'll fix that.
- -B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBSIMuQXEjvBPtnXfVAQLFVwP/SYQkNNHnReOOuPxnnJQkNqKTnDYLpZqT
9J0y/fExHPDNxrawPnxQ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 4, 2008, at 4:42 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
How up to date is this?
Probably way out of date.
The best way to find tasks is to go to the tracker (bugs.python.org)
and search
for issues tagged with version 3.0. Preferably the "release
blo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 21, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
But waiting until all the betas have gone out totally defeats the
purpose of the betas! It has already been stated that new code changes
that are even remotely shaky or anything not small needs a code
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 11, 2008, at 5:51 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Barry Warsaw python.org> writes:
I agree. Our last beta is scheduled for this wednesday
Are you sure?
According to http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2008-July/014269.html
,
i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 11, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Ah darn, that's a typo in the PEP. I definitely meant August 13, as
the Google calendar shows.
Do we think we can be ready for beta3 this Wednesday? If not, I'd
rather stick to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 12, 2008, at 10:30 AM, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
[I just saw the other post about unit testing, while I was writing
this.
A strange conincidence.]
Indeed. I've played around (again) recently with both nose and
py.test, so I'd like to mak
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 12, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
A SIG might be a good idea. There's also already the "testing in
python"
list, too:
http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/testing-in-python
A lot of this discussion would be appropriate there.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 12, 2008, at 11:13 AM, C. Titus Brown wrote:
I'll forward this idea on to testing-in-python:
http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/testing-in-python
where there was another bikeshed discussion about testing, a few weeks
ago. That might b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 13, 2008, at 1:53 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Because there won't typically be sufficient testing and release
infrastructure to allow arbitrary bug fixes to be committed on the
branch. The buildbots are turned off, and nobody tests the release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 13, 2008, at 10:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not migrate support for older releases to interested parties
outside of
the regular developer team? Presuming there is someone out there
with the
interest in maintaining, say, Python 2.2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 13, 2008, at 7:11 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
There's a difference between never being released, and unavailable in
the source repository.
So would you have preferred if I had forked another branch that still
contained these patches? Such br
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 18, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Does anyone have connections with the owners of pythonmac.org?
Apparently they are serving up an ancient version of Python 2.5. The
Google App Engine has a minor issue in 2.5 that's solved in 2.5
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 18, 2008, at 6:13 PM, Fred Drake wrote:
On Aug 18, 2008, at 5:42 PM, Steve Holden wrote:
Someone told me the other day that macports made for difficult
installs, but not being a Mac user I wasn't in a position to
evaluate the advice.
No
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 16, 2008, at 12:52 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 7:04 AM, Facundo Batista
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> The issue 600362 has two patches (one for 2.6 and the other for 3.0)
>> that are ready to commit (with a small
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello everyone,
I am going to try to release the last planned beta of 2.6 and 3.0 this
Wednesday. Looking at the stable buildbots and showstopper bugs indicates
some work to do between now and then. Here are the showstoppers, along with
my recommend
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I will be hanging out as much as possible over the next two days on
the #python-dev channel on freenode IRC. If you have any last minute
decisions you need, that will be the most immediate way to get in
touch with me.
Modulo work commitments,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 19, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Fred Drake wrote:
My understanding is that if there is a system Python, you shouldn't
change it. Ever.
Huge, big, honkin' +1 from me on that. Besides, for a system Python,
you want your distribution to manage pack
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 19, 2008, at 9:02 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:29 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
1878class attribute cache failure (regression)
- - Medium priority
- - Guido, there are some design choice
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 19, 2008, at 1:28 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
My understanding is that if there is a system Python, you shouldn't
change it. Ever.
Huge, big, honkin' +1 from me on that. Besides, for a system Python,
you want your distribution to manage packa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 19, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:43 PM, An
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Pending a resolution of bug 3611 (which has an attached patch that
we're testing now), I plan on releasing 2.6 and 3.0 beta 3 tonight.
Please do not make any commits to the trees unless you ask me first,
until further notice. I am on #python-de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Can anybody verify and hopefully fix the problems seen in the Windows bots for
the trunk (i.e. 2.6)?
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/stable/
3.0 doesn't look too bad, and I'm going to release beta 3 anyway, but I hope
we can get the 2.6 Windows bu
:
http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.6/
and the Python 3.0 web site:
http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.0/
See PEP 361 for release schedule details:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0361/
Enjoy,
- -Barry
Barry Warsaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager
(on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Which is the best state I've ever managed to get the 64bit build to.
Note however that bsddb3 was skipped by my tests. Running that test
alone,
both platforms report the same error as the buildbot:
FAIL: test01_basic_replication
(bsddb.test.tes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I was away for the weekend and am struggling to catch up on my email.
Since I haven't digested this entire thread, I'll refrain for the
moment from giving my opinion, however this comment jumped out to me.
On Aug 22, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Facundo B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 25, 2008, at 1:13 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Several people at Google seem to have independently discovered that
despite all of the platform-independent goodness in subprocess.py, you
still need to be platform aware. One of my colleagues sum
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:30 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.1.0/
"Unicode 5.1.0 contains over 100,000 characters, and provides
significant additions and improvements..." to existing features,
including new files and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 25, 2008, at 1:33 PM, Oleg Broytmann wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 01:30:58PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Unless I'm misremembering (I no longer have access to Windows), I
believe that if you use ' '.join(cmd) as the first ar
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 25, 2008, at 1:53 PM, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I agree. This seriously feels like new, potentially high risk code
to be adding this late in the game. The BDFL can always override,
but unless someone is really
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 25, 2008, at 2:15 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
Guido's request was just for updating the Unicode database with
the data from 5.1 - without adding new support for properties or
changing the interfaces.
See this page for a list of changes to the U
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 25, 2008, at 3:17 PM, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
You don't mean the experts claimed they weren't important, right?
Unimportant changes definitely don't need to go in now .
Well, at least Guido managed to fi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 26, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Antoine Pitrou
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
Thanks to Neil Schemenauer, we now have some Mercurial mirrors
hosted at
http://code.python.org/hg/
Co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 26, 2008, at 6:28 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Brett Cannon python.org> writes:
But can we push branches up to our personal directories on
code.python.org like we can with bzr?
If you have an ssh access to code.python.org, it should be easy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 28, 2008, at 6:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
What is the rationale behind the distinction between "stable" and
"unstable"
buildbots?
I ask that because the OpenBSD buildbot has failed compiling 3.0 for
quite some
time, but since that build
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 2, 2008, at 8:09 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
I suppose this is due to Martin building the installers and him not
be available at the moment.
He should be back today.
Since Python on Windows will likely only get very few beta testers
without
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 2, 2008, at 5:58 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 7:24 AM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 2, 2008, at 8:09 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
I suppose this is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 3, 2008, at 7:01 PM, Jesus Cea wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
and I know Brett agrees, so that's it. On IRC, I've just asked
Benjamin
to do the honors for 3.0 and Brett will add the deprecations for 2.6.
I just committed the fix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm not going to release rc1 tonight. There are too many open release
blockers that I don't want to defer, and I'd like the buildbots to
churn through the bsddb removal on all platforms. Let me first thank
Benjamin, Brett, Mark and Antoine for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:14 AM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[Barry]
I'm not going to release rc1 tonight.
Can I go ahead with some bug fixes and doc improvements
or should I wait until after Friday?
Doc fixes are fine. Please have bug fix patches re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 4, 2008, at 3:28 AM, Mark Hammond wrote:
Barry writes:
In addition, Mark reported in IRC that there are some regressions in
the logging module.
3772 logging module fails with non-ascii data
Which according to the IRC discussion doesn't a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 4, 2008, at 7:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Barry> In addition, Mark reported in IRC that there are some
regressions
Barry> in the logging module.
Vinay apparently checked in some changes to the logging module with no
review. In
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 4, 2008, at 7:31 AM, Facundo Batista wrote:
(I'll be hanging around in #python-dev today and tomorrow, btw, ping
me if I can help you)
Me too, though I'm a bit busy at work. Ping my nick 'barry' if you
need any RM-level decision.
- -Ba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 4, 2008, at 9:45 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Barry> Or did he commit Mark's patch from bug 3772? If so, that
would
Barry> count as a reviewed patch.
The checkin message says issue 3726:
Author: vinay.sajip
Date: Wed Sep 3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 7, 2008, at 10:51 AM, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I'm not going to release rc1 tonight. There are too many open
release blockers that I don't want to defer, and I'd like the
buildbots to churn through the b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 7, 2008, at 4:12 PM, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
(I have a few minor ET fixes, and possibly a Unicode 5.1 patch,
but have had absolutely no time to spend on that. is the window
still open?)
There are 8 open release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 8, 2008, at 7:37 AM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 12:02:06PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
There are 8 open release blockers, a few of which have patches that
need
review. So I think we are still not ready to release rc1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I don't think there's any way we're going to make our October 1st
goal. We have 8 open release critical bugs, and 18 deferred
blockers. We do not have a beta3 Windows installer and I don't have
high hopes for rectifying all of these problems i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 9, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
It's also a bug that was introduced by the late API changes made to
WarningsRecorder in r66135 (when WarningsRecorder was moved from
test.test_support to warnings to make it officially supported for us
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 8, 2008, at 1:13 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Perhaps it's time to separate the 2.6 and 3.0 release schedules? I
don't care if the next version of OSX contains 3.0 or not -- but I do
care about it having 2.6.
I've talked with my contact at M
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 8, 2008, at 7:25 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Well, from the number of release blockers it sounds like another 3.0
beta is the right thing. For 2.6 however I believe we're much closer
to the finish line -- there aren't all those bytes/str issu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:07 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[Guido van Rossum]
Well, from the number of release blockers it sounds like another 3.0
beta is the right thing. For 2.6 however I believe we're much closer
to the finish line -- there aren't al
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 9, 2008, at 3:22 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
Even if I can't contribute very much at the moment, I'm still +1 to
that.
I doubt Python would get nice publicity if we released a 3.0 but had
to
tell everyone, "but don't really use it yet, it may
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
We had a lot of discussion recently about changing the release
schedule and splitting Python 2.6 and 3.0. There was general
consensus that this was a good idea, in order to hit our October 1
deadline for Python 2.6 final at least.
There is on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 12, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
We had a lot of discussion recently about changing the release
schedule and
splitting Python 2.6 and 3.0. The
://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0361/
Enjoy,
- -Barry
Barry Warsaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager
(on behalf of the entire python-dev team)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBSMsXV3EjvBPtnXfVAQJFsgP9GxZYQocbDTd0Z/0yEjpHfZ/FTd8y83jV
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 17, 2008, at 5:59 AM, Jesus Cea wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community,
I am
happy to announce the first release candidate for Python 2.6.
In http://www.python.org/download/releases
/download/releases/2.6/
and the Python 3.0 web site:
http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.0/
See PEP 361 for release schedule details:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0361/
Enjoy,
- -Barry
Barry Warsaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager
(on behalf of the entire python
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin points out that in the past, as part of the release process,
we've built separate downloadable documentation.
Do we still want to do that for Python 2.6 and 3.0, and if so, how do
we go about doing that? I have this feeling that building
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 21, 2008, at 6:03 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
Barry Warsaw schrieb:
Martin points out that in the past, as part of the release process,
we've built separate downloadable documentation.
Do we still want to do that for Python 2.6 and 3.0, a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 23, 2008, at 4:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Benjamin Peterson wound up writing a test case for the new C atexit
module
on the py3k branch. A similar test, though different in detail,
makes sense
for the Python atexit module on trunk.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 24, 2008, at 5:47 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Bob Ippolito wrote:
How much time do I
have left to get this into Python 2.6?
Zero I'm afraid - with rc1 out, it's release blocker bugs only.
Anything
which can be deferred to the 2.6.1 release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This is a reminder that Python 2.6 final is schedule for release next
Wednesday, October 1st.
Once again, I've gone through the release blocker issues and knocked
anything that doesn't specifically affect 2.6 to deferred blocker.
This leaves
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've been out of town since Friday, but I don't yet see anything in
the 700 billion email messages I'm now catching up on that leads me to
think we need to delay the release. Yay!
I will be on irc later today and will be trolling through the tr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 30, 2008, at 7:27 AM, Jan Mate(jek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mate> wrote:
Thanks for your answer. I guess the process is the real problem then.
- From what i could observe, the connection between vendor-sec and
PSRT is
not really working as it
ad/releases/2.6/
(Please note that due to quirks in the earth's time zones, the Windows
installers will be available shortly.)
Bugs can be reported in the Python bug tracker:
http://bugs.python.org
Enjoy,
- -Barry
Barry Warsaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager
(on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 2, 2008, at 12:19 AM, Haoyu Bai wrote:
Now almost all the pages on docs.python.org can't be accessed. For
example http://docs.python.org/lib/lib.html returns 403 forbidden.
Thanks to Georg and Thomas, the docs should all be fixed now.
- -B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 1, 2008, at 11:46 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I
am happy to announce the release of Python 2.6 final. This is the
production-ready version of the latest in the Python 2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 3, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
So now that we've released 2.6 and are working hard on shepherding 3.0
out the door, it's time to worry about the next set of releases. :)
I propose that we dramatically shorten our release cycle
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 3, 2008, at 7:34 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Wow! I guess release.py is going to get really automated then. =) That
or you are going to manage to con more of us to help out (and even cut
the release ourselves).
release.py is really coming along
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0. My
suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 2
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
Given what still needs to be done, is this a reasonable schedule? Do
we n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 6, 2008, at 9:48 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[Barry Warsaw]
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0.
My suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 2
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
Given
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0.
My
suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-No
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 5:47 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 6, 2008, at 9:48 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[Barry Warsaw]
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0.
My suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 rc 2
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 4
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
I've updated PEP 361 and the Google calendar with this schedule,
except that the PEP says that rc3 and r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I won't be able to cut another release between the 15th and 5th, so
at least that one should be 2 weeks. If we don't need the
additional rc, then we can release early, which would p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 28, 2008, at 04:17 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>Yes, that's what it feels like. I hope the pace picks up again and we
>can release 3.0 final in early December still. I really don't want to
>carry it over to 2009.
Don't worry, it won't. As I m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>Since some months, I'm trying to improve Python but it's difficult because
>I'm not allowed to push patches and I have to wait for some reviews and then
>for someone interrested by my patches. Somet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 30, 2008, at 01:02 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> Let me remind you though that I've been mostly unavailable for the past two
>> weeks at a work conference.
>
>Cool, you're back :-) But my email was not against you.
Well, not quite. :) Monday.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 31, 2008, at 08:44 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
>Brett Cannon schrieb:
>> I just tried to update my 3.0 branch in hg from
>> http://code.python.org/hg/branches/py3k/ and hg is telling me it's a
>> 404. Anyone else having trouble?
>
>404 here too.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 31, 2008, at 08:58 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>Naw, I think I just f'd up the Apache conf. I'll try to fix that.
And by "I'll" of course I meant "Martin". :)
Thanks Martin!
- -Barry
-BEGIN PGP SIG
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 31, 2008, at 03:50 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
>I posted this yesterday about using bzr:
>
> >I'd like to try it out, but the instructions on
> > http://www.python.org/dev/bazaar/ say to get wget
> > http://code.python.org/snapshots/python-bzr-snapsh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 30, 2008, at 10:22 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
On Thursday 30 October 2008, Victor Stinner wrote:
One of the reasons why I'm very keen on us moving to a distributed
version control system is to help break the logjam on core
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:04 AM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:04:42AM +, Barry Warsaw wrote:
One of the reasons why I'm very keen on us moving to a distributed
version
control system is to help break the logjam on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 3, 2008, at 2:46 AM, Ralf Schmitt wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:05 AM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have started the DVCS PEP which can be seen at
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7fctr4_40dvjkdg64 . Not much is there
beyond th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 3, 2008, at 12:58 PM, C. Titus Brown wrote:
-> Sticking with a dvcs implemented in Python makes the best sense,
-> especially when you consider the plugin architecture. When we
-> selected a new tracker, we didn't make implementation in Pyth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 3, 2008, at 1:13 PM, Ralf Schmitt wrote:
I have used mercurial extensively (before having used git) and I think
git is great.
It gives you much more freedom to work with your source code than
mercurial.
Ralf, can you describe what you mea
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 31, 2008, at 6:28 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin> I have now restored the original URL structure, and moved
the
Martin> loggerhead installation to
Martin> http://code.python.org/loggerhead/
A couple nits. Leaving off the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 3, 2008, at 11:54 AM, Thomas Wouters wrote:
FWIW, I put one up this weekend, and it seems to be intact and OK.
(bzr+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/python/2.6/ or http://code.python.org/python/2.6/
)
Excellent, thanks! This is getting mirrored
1901 - 2000 of 2704 matches
Mail list logo
