Mailman 3 November 2010 - docs

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Alexander Belopolsky Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net> added the comment: Committed in r86504 (3.2) and r86505 (3.1). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Alexander Belopolsky Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net> added the comment: s/r86504 (3.1)/r86505 (3.1)/ ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Alexander Belopolsky Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net> added the comment: Committed in r86504 (3.2) and r86504 (3.1). ---------- resolution: -> accepted stage: patch review -> committed/rejected status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Éric Araujo Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Éric Araujo <merwok(a)netwok.org> added the comment: Looks good. Some remarks: 1) I assume you have checked that this code does not produce two newlines (one in the string, one from the print function or write method): +[snip], consult the module reference at the location listed above. +""") 2) “If you can suggest some simple test for pointing to 'dev' instead of 'release/X.Y'” → sys.version_info[3] != 'final' 3) People seem to go the the most recent version of the docs, not the release-specific version (I haven’t found the python-dev thread about that, maybe you remember it). The version{add,chang}ed directives help adjust the doc for older versions. So, are you sure it’s useful to make the links release-specific? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

2 1

"Python 3.x may be less useful than 2.x"
by Alexander Belopolsky Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Is this still the party line? http://docs.python.org/dev/faq/general.html#how-stable-is-python

3 4

[issue7828] chr() and ord() documentation for wide characters
by Alexander Belopolsky Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Changes by Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net>: ---------- assignee: docs@python -> belopolsky nosy: +belopolsky _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7828> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Alexander Belopolsky Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Changes by Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net>: ---------- stage: -> patch review _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Alexander Belopolsky Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net> added the comment: The attached patch, issue10446.diff, makes help(sys) look as follows: NAME sys MODULE REFERENCE http://docs.python.org/release/3.2/library/sys The following documentation is automatically generated from the Python source files. It may be incomplete, incorrect or include features that are considered implementation detail and may vary between Python implementations. When in doubt, consult the module reference at the location listed above. DESCRIPTION This module provides access to some objects used or maintained by the interpreter and to functions that interact strongly with the interpreter. .. Georg, I noticed that there is no http://docs.python.org/release/3.2 link yet, but I don't want to complicate the URL generation logic unnecessarily to accommodate pre-release versions. If you can suggest some simple test for pointing to 'dev' instead of 'release/X.Y', I'll add it, but I don't see it as a priority. If you test the patch from the source tree, please note that pydoc has some strange logic that excludes uninstalled modules except ones in a hardcoded list. This should be changed at some point. ---------- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file19629/issue10446.diff _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Éric Araujo Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Éric Araujo <merwok(a)netwok.org> added the comment: +1 to Georg. Note that there are people that feel uncomfortable with calling packages modules, but not me. ---------- nosy: +eric.araujo _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue10446] pydoc3 links to 2.x library reference
by Georg Brandl Nov. 17, 2010

Nov. 17, 2010

Georg Brandl <georg(a)python.org> added the comment: +1 to all. What about the best of both worlds: "MODULE REFERENCE"? ---------- nosy: +georg.brandl _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10446> _______________________________________

1 0