Re: [Python-Dev] Instructions on using git mirror

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 27, 2009, at 5:24 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: Where's a good place for this? I'm thinking three bullets under "Core Development" on this page: http://wiki.python.org/moin/ I've now moved the Bazaar instructions to the wiki. See * http://wik

Re: [Python-Dev] asyncore fixes in Python 2.6 broke Zope's version of medusa

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 4, 2009, at 2:44 PM, gl...@divmod.com wrote: Maintaining compatibility with the 2.6.x version of asyncore presupposes that *someone* has written some software against that version of asyncore and it might break if they installed an upgrade

Re: [Python-Dev] Integrate BeautifulSoup into stdlib?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 5, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: Instead, let's hope Linux distros pick it up (and if anyone knows how to encourage that, let us know). Gentoo: emerge lxml Ubuntu (and probably Debian): apt-get install python-lxml Guido, do y

Re: [Python-Dev] patch commit policies (was [issue4308] repr of httplib.IncompleteRead is stupid)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 5, 2009, at 6:18 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: That aside, is it actually a python-wide policy to *forbid* patching older releases where the patch isn't security-related? I set this policy for the releases I manage, namely 2.4 and 2.5. This

Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.1 alpha 1

n 3.1. Congratulations on your first baby! Here's to hoping you release many more of these! Yes, well done, Benjamin. Barry Warsaw is walking with a spring in his steps again ;-) I was wondering why the weather here in DC has turned so beautiful after last week's snow storm! Barry

Re: [Python-Dev] BZR mirror and pushing to Launchpad

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 9, 2009, at 1:26 AM, Andrew Bennetts wrote: On the other hand, it does appear that is a branch that is not stacking-capable. I'm not sure how this could happen by following the instr

Re: [Python-Dev] BZR mirror and pushing to Launchpad

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 9, 2009, at 9:02 AM, R. David Murray wrote: On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 at 08:15, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Mar 9, 2009, at 1:26 AM, Andrew Bennetts wrote: On the other hand, it does appear that <https://code.launchpad.net/~rdmurray/python/bug5450&

Re: [Python-Dev] Ext4 data loss

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 10, 2009, at 4:23 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Christian Heimes wrote: Multiple blogs and news sites are swamped with a discussion about ext4 and KDE 4.0. Theodore Ts'o - the developer of ext4 - explains th

Re: [Python-Dev] Ext4 data loss

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 10, 2009, at 4:46 PM, Neil Hodgson wrote: The technique advocated by Theodore Ts'o (save to temporary then rename) discards metadata. What would be useful is a simple, generic way in Python to copy all the appropriate metadata (ownership, A

[Python-Dev] py: urls, new bazaar plugin available

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Bazaar users! There's a new Bazaar plugin you can use to more easily access read- only or read-write branches on code.python.org. This plugin provides the 'py:' url prefix. For example, to get the trunk branch with the plugin installed,

Re: [Python-Dev] Issue workflow doc is now live

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 23, 2009, at 8:31 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: Brett Cannon wrote: I sent this out as a Google Doc a while back, but I just did a proof-reading, converted it, and pushed it live to the python.org : http://www.python.org/dev/wor

Re: [Python-Dev] Integrate BeautifulSoup into stdlib?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 25, 2009, at 9:01 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: And a package based solution that satisfies everyone (or even a significant majority), be they on Windows, OS X, .deb based Linux, .rpm based Linux, some other Linux or *nix, be they a mere user or

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 25, 2009, at 9:02 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote: Yes but this means that you have to wait for the next version of the "big" package when a bug is corrected or a feature added, or you need to patch it. (or maybe use the namespace trick to override it)

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:16 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: It fails for software I am directly involved in, or maybe the layer just below: for example, there is no way for me to get a python 2.6 on my distribution (Ubuntu), so I cannot easily test the py

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Olemis Lang wrote: Yes you're right, Trac requires .egg files for local plugins installs (... in /plugins folder ;) so that not all environments but only one be able to use the plugin ... but that's not exactly what I'm

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:37 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: If anything, Twisted's example shows how monolithic packages are easier all-around than micro-packages. We basically have the release infrastructure to release Twisted in many smaller piec

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 25, 2009, at 6:06 PM, Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote: For case one, where I want to install additional functionality into my system Python interpreter "forever", it would be great to have my system manage this. In fact, I think it /has/ to.

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 25, 2009, at 6:24 PM, P.J. Eby wrote: At 06:08 PM 3/25/2009 -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote: I've found setuptools entry points difficult to work with for plugins, I'd be interested in hearing more about your specific difficulties,

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: 2009/3/26 Toshio Kuratomi : Depending on the definition of a "resource" there's additional information that could be needed. For instance, if resource includes message catalogs, then being a

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: One thing that /would/ be helpful though is the ability to list all the resources under a specific package path. This is (I think) one use case that pkg_resource fails to support and it's the

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:41 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote: I think shutil.copytree new ignore mechanism handles this use case pretty well (see the ignore_patterns factory in http://docs.python.org/library/shutil.html) Maybe we could use the same pattern. Th

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: One thing that /would/ be helpful though is the ability to list all the resources under a specific package path. This is (I think) one use case that pkg_resource fails to support and it's the one pl

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: {{{ [x for x in dir(pkg_resources) if all(y in x for y in ['dir', 'resource_'])] ['resource_isdir', 'resource_listdir'] BTW, under a better name, I would support putting pkg_resources in the st

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 3:07 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: One thing that /would/ be helpful though is the

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: BTW, under a better name, I would support putting pkg_resources in the stdlib. ... or a subset of it ? or integrating its features with

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 26, 2009, at 10:07 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: If it really is a common habit to have single-file modules with associated data files directly rooted under a namespace package, we could change the API to allow passing in a module and have it b

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 27, 2009, at 7:51 AM, Olemis Lang wrote: from pkg_resources import * for fnm in sorted(resource_listdir('mailman.database', 'sql'), \ my_own_cmp ): # Only if needed ... ;) Thanks, it was pkg_resource.resource_listdir() th

Re: [Python-Dev] "setuptools has divided the Python community"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 27, 2009, at 2:27 PM, Eric Smith wrote: Olemis Lang wrote: I also think the feature should go. If you want functionality that's so difficult to provide when you install as a zip file, the answer is not to make things more complex, but to

Re: [Python-Dev] splitting out bdist_*

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 28, 2009, at 10:10 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: I really don't see how that kind of thing can be easily supported by a Python module maintainer, unless they're also the downstream packager. They simply can't. As a package developer, I'd

[Python-Dev] Python 2.6.2

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'd like to release Python 2.6.2 the week after the conference. I've talked to a few people here about it and the general consensus is that we do one brown-paper-bag-avoiding release candidate first. Looking at the calendar, I propose the foll

[Python-Dev] Python 3.0.2

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 We made a decision at the sprints today about Python 3.0. We've agreed that there will be one more release, 3.0.2 and then that's it. Because of the earlier decision to drop all support for Python 3.0 once 3.1 is released, we won't be doing an

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3.0.2

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 30, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: I would think that after 3.1 would be best to get any and all fixes that go into 3.1. That fits nicely with our general policy, so that the only difference with 3.0 is that we won't do any securi

Re: [Python-Dev] OSError.errno => exception hierarchy?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 2, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Jack diederich wrote: On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: 2009/4/2 Gustavo Carneiro : Apologies if this has already been discussed. I don't believe it has ever been discussed to be implemented.

Re: [Python-Dev] unittest package

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 2, 2009, at 4:58 PM, Michael Foord wrote: The unittest module is around 1500 lines of code now, and the tests are 3000 lines. It would be much easier to maintain as a package rather than a module. Shall I work on a suggested structure or

Re: [Python-Dev] Package Management - thoughts from the peanut gallery

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 3, 2009, at 4:01 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote: Each one of this task has a leader, except the one with (*). I just got back from travelling, and I will reorganize http://wiki.python.org/moin/Distutils asap to it is up-to-date. I added a link to

Re: [Python-Dev] Mercurial?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 5, 2009, at 5:06 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: - decide what to do with the bzr mirrors I don't see any reason to keep them running on python.org. There are, or will be, other alternatives. Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Gn

[Python-Dev] Tools

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Someone (I'm sorry, I forgot who) asked me at Pycon about stripping out Demos and Tools. I'm happy to remove the two I wrote - Tools/ world and Tools/pynche - from the distribution and release them as separate projects (retaining the PSF license

Re: [Python-Dev] Mercurial?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 6, 2009, at 7:55 AM, Michael Foord wrote: Gated checkins can work fine but can also have many problems. For example if we have a spuriously failing test then if you are working on an unrelated issue it will be entirely up to chance as to w

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 382: Namespace Packages

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 6, 2009, at 9:21 AM, Jesse Noller wrote: On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 4:33 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: On 2009-04-02 17:32, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I propose the following PEP for inclusion to Python 3.1. Thanks for picking this up. I'd like to e

Re: [Python-Dev] Tools

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 5, 2009, at 7:37 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: Barry Warsaw schrieb: Someone (I'm sorry, I forgot who) asked me at Pycon about stripping out Demos and Tools. I'm happy to remove the two I wrote - Tools/world and Tools/pynche

[Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 2.6.2 candidate 1

page: http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.6.2/ Bugs can be reported in the Python bug tracker: http://bugs.python.org Enjoy, Barry Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager (on behalf of the entire python-dev team) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 9, 2009, at 1:15 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Guido van Rossum python.org> writes: I'm kind of surprised that a serialization protocol like JSON wouldn't support reading/writing bytes (as the serialized format -- I don't care about having

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 8:07 AM, Steve Holden wrote: The real problem I came across in storing email in a relational database was the inability to store messages as Unicode. Some messages have a body in one encoding and an attachment in another, so the only ways to store the messages are either as

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 11:08 AM, Bill Janssen wrote: Barry Warsaw wrote: Anyway, aside from that decision, I haven't come up with an elegant way to allow /output/ in both bytes and strings (input is I think theoretically easier by sniffing the arguments). Probably a good thing. It

Re: [Python-Dev] the email module, text, and bytes (was Re: Dropping bytes "support" in json)

On Apr 9, 2009, at 11:11 PM, gl...@divmod.com wrote: I think this is a problematic way to model bytes vs. text; it gives text a special relationship to bytes which should be avoided. IMHO the right way to think about domains like this is a multi-level representation. The "low level" repres

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Aahz wrote: On Thu, Apr 09, 2009, Barry Warsaw wrote: So, what I'm really asking is this. Let's say you agree that there are use cases for accessing a header value as either the raw encoded bytes or the decoded unicode. What should this return:

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 2:25 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: This is an interesting question, and something I'm struggling with for the email package for 3.x. It turns out to be pretty convenient to have both a bytes and a string API, both for input and output, but I think email really wants to be re

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 11:55 AM, Daniel Stutzbach wrote: On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: Anyway, aside from that decision, I haven't come up with an elegant way to allow /output/ in both bytes and strings (input is I think theoretically easier by sniffing the argu

Re: [Python-Dev] email package Bytes vs Unicode (was Re: Dropping bytes "support" in json)

On Apr 9, 2009, at 12:20 PM, Steve Holden wrote: PostgreSQL strongly encourages you to store text as encoded columns. Because emails lack an encoding it turns out this is a most inconvenient storage type for it. Sadly BLOBs are such a pain in PostgreSQL that it's easier to store the message

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 11:21 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: Barry Warsaw wrote: I don't know whether the parameter thing will work or not, but you're probably right that we need to get the bytes-everywhere API first. Given that json is a wire protocol, that sounds like the right approach f

[Python-Dev] Python 2.6.2 final

I wanted to cut Python 2.6.2 final tonight, but for family reasons I won't be able to do so until Monday. Please be conservative in any commits to the 2.6 branch between now and then. bugs.python.org is apparently down right now, but I set issue 5724 to release blocker for 2.6.2. This is

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 10, 2009, at 1:19 AM, gl...@divmod.com wrote: On 02:38 am, ba...@python.org wrote: So, what I'm really asking is this. Let's say you agree that there are use cases for accessing a header value as either the raw encoded bytes or the decoded unicode. What should this return: >>> mes

Re: [Python-Dev] [Email-SIG] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 11:41 PM, Tony Nelson wrote: At 22:38 -0400 04/09/2009, Barry Warsaw wrote: ... So, what I'm really asking is this. Let's say you agree that there are use cases for accessing a header value as either the raw encoded bytes or the decoded unicode. What should t

Re: [Python-Dev] [Email-SIG] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 9, 2009, at 11:59 PM, Tony Nelson wrote: Thinking about this stuff makes me nostalgic for the sloppy happy days of Python 2.x You now have the opportunity to finally unsnarl that mess. It is not an insurmountable opportunity. No, it's just a full time job . Now where did I put

Re: [Python-Dev] [Email-SIG] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 10, 2009, at 1:22 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: Those objects have headers and payload. The payload can be of any type, though I think it generally breaks down into "strings" for text/ * types and bytes for anything else (not counting multiparts). *sigh* Why are you back-tracking?

Re: [Python-Dev] [Email-SIG] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 10, 2009, at 2:00 PM, Glenn Linderman wrote: If one name has to be longer than the other, it should be the bytes version. Real user code is more likely to want to use the text version, and hopefully there will be more of that type of code than implementations using bytes. I'm not

Re: [Python-Dev] [Email-SIG] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 10, 2009, at 2:06 PM, Michael Foord wrote: Shouldn't headers always be text? /me weeps PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/py

Re: [Python-Dev] [Email-SIG] the email module, text, and bytes (was Re: Dropping bytes "support" in json)

On Apr 10, 2009, at 3:06 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: Bill Janssen writes: Barry Warsaw wrote: In that case, we really need the bytes-in-bytes-out-bytes-in-the-chewy- center API first, and build things on top of that. Yep. Uh, I hate to rain on a parade, but isn't that how we ar

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.2 final

On Apr 11, 2009, at 8:20 AM, Mark Dickinson wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: bugs.python.org is apparently down right now, but I set issue 5724 to release blocker for 2.6.2. This is waiting for input from Mark Dickinson, and it relates to test_cmath failing on

Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 10, 2009, at 11:08 AM, James Y Knight wrote: Until you write a parser for every header, you simply cannot decode to unicode. The only sane choices are: 1) raw bytes 2) parsed structured data The email package does not need a parser for every header, but it should provide a framework

Re: [Python-Dev] [Email-SIG] Dropping bytes "support" in json

On Apr 10, 2009, at 2:00 PM, Glenn Linderman wrote: If one name has to be longer than the other, it should be the bytes version. Real user code is more likely to want to use the text version, and hopefully there will be more of that type of code than implementations using bytes. Of cours

Re: [Python-Dev] headers api for email package

On Apr 11, 2009, at 8:39 AM, Chris Withers wrote: Barry Warsaw wrote: >>> message['Subject'] The raw bytes or the decoded unicode? A header object. Yep. You got there before I did. :) Okay, so you've picked one. Now how do you spell the other way? str(messa

[Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 2.6.2

page: http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.6.2/ Please report bugs for any Python version in the Python tracker: http://bugs.python.org Enjoy, -Barry Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager (on behalf of the entire python-dev team) PGP.sig Description: This

Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 2.6.2

On Apr 15, 2009, at 4:47 PM, Russell E. Owen wrote: Thank you for 2.6.2. I see the Mac binary installer isn't out yet (at least it is not listed on the downloads page). Any chance that it will be compatible with 3rd party Tcl/Tk? Most recent releases have not been; the only way I know to ma

Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 2.6.2

On Apr 17, 2009, at 5:42 AM, Piet van Oostrum wrote: Maybe a link to the MacOSX image can also be added to http://www.python.org/download Done. -Barry PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-

Re: [Python-Dev] 3.1 beta blockers

On Apr 20, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Ned Deily wrote: In article <1afaf6160904201509g2f5e784ah34c728732ca9b...@mail.gmail.com>, Benjamin Peterson wrote: I forgot one: [...] What about #5756 - idle, pydoc, et al removed from 3.1? Were we going to remove this from 2.7 also? I'm working on splitting

Re: [Python-Dev] Oddity PEP 0 key

On May 1, 2009, at 5:55 PM, Michael Foord wrote: P for Proposal (to replace Active Proposal)? Every active PEP is a proposal... +1 Maybe even s/Active/Proposed/g ? -Barry PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Python-D

Re: [Python-Dev] Switchover: mail.python.org

On May 11, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: -On [20090511 14:47], Aahz (a...@pythoncraft.com) wrote: On Monday 2009-05-11, mail.python.org will be switched to another machine starting roughly at 14:00 UTC. This should be invisible (expected downtime is less than ten min

Re: [Python-Dev] Shorter release schedule?

On May 12, 2009, at 6:06 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Just food for thought here, but seeing how 3.1 is going to be a real featureful schedule despite being released shortly after 3.0, wouldn't it make sense to tighten future release planning a little? I was thinking something like doing a ma

Re: [Python-Dev] Issues with Py3.1's new ipaddr

On Jun 2, 2009, at 10:43 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote: Should it only be removed from py3k branch or also from trunk pending a decision as to if the library is reworked or if something else entirely is adopted? I think it should be removed from trunk if it's removed from the py3k branch. Noth

Re: [Python-Dev] Issues with Py3.1's new ipaddr

On Jun 2, 2009, at 10:39 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: I hope we can learn from this. One crazy thought: let's use the Cheeseshop. When I search for 'ipaddr' I get three hits, with Google's module at the top with a score of '8'. I really don't know what that means but I'm guessing it means

Re: [Python-Dev] Status of 2.7 and 3.2

On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: Assuming the policy "release new features for 2.x only after they got released for 3.x". I don't think such a policy actually exists. The policy, as I remember it, can be summed up: don't innovate new features in the 2.x branch. Meaning, a

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] r73569 - peps/trunk/pep-0101.txt

On Jun 26, 2009, at 8:49 AM, benjamin.peterson wrote: Author: benjamin.peterson Date: Fri Jun 26 14:48:55 2009 New Revision: 73569 Log: update release candidate shorthand Modified: peps/trunk/pep-0101.txt Modified: peps/trunk/pep-0101.txt = = = = = = = =

Re: [Python-Dev] Mercurial migration: progress report (PEP 385)

On Jul 3, 2009, at 5:00 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I'm -1 on calling it "sys.revision", as this makes it difficult to tell what the actual versioning system was, and hence how the data should be interpreted. It will already be a problem for 2.6, when 2.6.3 will currently have a sys.subversion[2]

Re: [Python-Dev] Mercurial migration: progress report (PEP 385)

On Jul 3, 2009, at 6:15 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I'm fine with that plan - but the original problem remains. We will surely release 2.6.4 at some point, and it will have a different version identification (based on hg rev ids). So those existing applications (which are probably few) will t

Re: [Python-Dev] Python mail-to-news gateway status (was: www/svn python.org status update)

On Aug 10, 2009, at 9:42 PM, Ben Finney wrote: "A.M. Kuchling" writes: The following sites are up again on a new machine, but cannot be updated through SVN hooks or whatever mechanism: www.python.org docs.python.org www.jython.org planet.python.org planet.jython.org I don't see ‘lists.pyth

Re: [Python-Dev] deleting setdefaultencoding iin site.py is evil

On Aug 27, 2009, at 9:08 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote: This is what I meant when I said what I said about correct code. If you're happy to have encoding errors and corrupt data, then I guess you're happy to have a function like setdefaultencoding. Whatever happened to "we're all adu

[Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer, but for various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd like to reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25- September. We should probably do a release candidate, so I'd like to make that on 23

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 9, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: Barry Warsaw wrote: I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer, but for various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd like to reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25- September.

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 9, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Ned Deily wrote: In article <11a6545d-7204-4f61-b55b-1cc77cb56...@python.org>, Barry Warsaw wrote: I still want to release by the 25th, but I'd be willing to move the rc to Monday the 21st. We're really just trying to avoid a brown bag moment

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 10, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: Barry Warsaw schrieb: I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer, but for various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd like to reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25- Sept

Re: [Python-Dev] Python Language Summit #2 in February

On Sep 16, 2009, at 7:53 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Of course, all this will perhaps have been discussed before the summit. Sure, but not resolved. :) I do think stdlib evolution should be high on the list of topics. -B PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 15, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote: The IDLE issue is IMHO a release blocker, as is issue 6851. So that leaves 4 release blockers for 2.6.3. Three of these are assigned to Ronald. Ronald are you sure you will have time to fix these by then? The one I'm still uncertain on

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 19, 2009, at 2:51 PM, qwavel wrote: What about this bug: http://bugs.python.org/issue3890 It appears to me that the SSL module is broken in the 2.6.x line on all platforms in one of its most common uses (non-blocking). It also seems that the problem and solution are well understood,

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 25, 2009, at 4:18 PM, Jesse Noller wrote: Barry - this is your call, but I think http://bugs.python.org/issue6990 should be a rel blocker too. Done. -Barry PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Python-Dev mailing

[Python-Dev] bug 3890

I'd like to include the patch for bug 3890 in Python 2.6.3. There is a patch by Amaury that has gotten the blessing of Bill Janssen, however the patch has no test. Is there anybody who can come up with a test in the next few hours so we can get this into 2.6.3rc1? If not, is the fix impo

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 389: argparse - new command line parsing module

On Sep 29, 2009, at 6:51 PM, Greg Ewing wrote: s...@pobox.com wrote: I have never completely wrapped my brain around optparse. Getopt I just remember. Seems to me that optparse and argparse are fairly similar in their APIs, and that argparse isn't going to be significantly easier to fit in o

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 389: argparse - new command line parsing module

On Sep 29, 2009, at 8:25 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: getopt is very procedural - you define a minimal amount regarding the options you accept, but then do the bulk of the command line processing yourself Right, and we shouldn't underestimate the cognitive load this imposes. All those twisty

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 389: argparse - new command line parsing module

On Sep 29, 2009, at 9:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: Keeping getopt around *and* including a "add_getopt_arguments" method in argparse is probably the best of both worlds, in that it allows for relatively straightforward evolution of an application: 1. Start with getopt 2. As the getopt argument

Re: [Python-Dev] test_thread tracebacks

On Sep 29, 2009, at 9:43 PM, s...@pobox.com wrote: It's been awhile since I rebuilt Python and ran the test suite. This evening I noticed this on my Mac (OS X 10.5): What version of Python? -Barry PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formatting

On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I would propose that the format argument gets an argument name, according to the syntax it is written in. For PEP 3101 format, I would call the argument "format" (like the method name of the string type), i.e. logging.Formatter( format="{asc

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:29 AM, Ned Deily wrote: In my opinion, the standard python.org OS X installer for 2.6.3 now "works well" on 10.4, 10.5, and 10.6 and is ready for release. Fantastic, thanks. Martin's uploaded the Windows binaries so I'll make the announcement now. No commits to the 2

[Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3rc1 available

The first (and hopefully last) release candidate for Python 2.6.3 is now available via http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.6.3/ Source releases and Windows binaries are currently available, and Mac OS X binaries should be forthcoming. Nearly 100 bugs have been fixed since 2.6.2. Bar

Re: [Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formatting

On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:22 AM, Steven Bethard wrote: On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I would propose that the format argument gets an argument name, according to the syntax it is written in. For PEP 3101 format, I

Re: [Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formatting

On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:39 AM, Steven Bethard wrote: Thanks for the clarification. I generally like this approach, though it's not so convenient for argparse which already takes format strings like this:: parser = ArgumentParser(usage='%(prog)s [--foo]') parser.add_argument( '--foo'

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 389: argparse - new command line parsing module

On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:58 PM, Robert Kern wrote: I don't think argparse supports the "foo --help subcommand" OOB. I think it would be simple to modify argparse to make it do so. It does support general options followed by a subcommand with options, though. Right. I've made it kind of wor

Re: [Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formatting

On Sep 30, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Why not allow logging.Formatter to take a callable, which would in turn call the callable with keyword arguments? Therefore, you could write: logging.Formatter("{asctime} - {name} - {level} - {msg}".format) This is a very interesting idea

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Sep 30, 2009, at 3:36 PM, Sridhar Ratnakumar wrote: 2.6.3rc1 builds fine on Linux x86/x86_64, MacOSX 10.4 ppc/x86, Windows 32bit/64bit, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris just like 2.6.2 did. Thanks for the feedback! Did you run the test suite on any of these? -Barry PGP.sig Description: This is

Re: [Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formatting

On Oct 1, 2009, at 2:51 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote: You're already covered if you use the PercentMessage/BraceMessage approach I mentioned elsewhere in this thread. Suppose: #Just typing this in, it's not tested or anything class DollarMessage: def __init__(self, fmt, *args, **kwargs): s

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6.3

On Oct 1, 2009, at 7:09 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: Scott Dial wrote: I would appreciate this bug being resolved before the next release as it effects me on a daily basis. I have submitted a patch, which reflects my local solution. Unfortunately, it's almost certainly too late to get this int

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >