Mailman 3 March 2008 - Python-Dev

editing the docs
by Benjamin Peterson March 30, 2008

March 30, 2008

Hi, Now that I'm starting to examine and do some edits on the docs, I'd like to ask some guidance. What editor(s) do you guys use? I'm not one to cling to an editor, so all suggestions are fair game. -- Thanks, Benjamin Peterson

4 4

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] the release gods are angry at python
by Jeffrey Yasskin March 29, 2008

March 29, 2008

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Bill Janssen <janssen(a)parc.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:31 AM, <skip(a)pobox.com> wrote: > > > > > > Neal> Anything that connects to a remote host is definitely flaky. > > > > > > Would it maybe help to set up a dedicated host (or virtual host) to serve as > > > the sole target of all network tests? > > > > It would help, but not fix the problem. There … [View More]

1 0

Decimal(unicode)
by Oleg Broytmann March 29, 2008

March 29, 2008

Hello. In Python 2.5.1 the code import decimal for d in '123', u'123': x = decimal.Decimal(d) print type(x.to_eng_string()) prints <type 'str'> <type 'str'> In 2.5.2 it prints <type 'str'> <type 'unicode'> Why the change? Is it a bug or a feature? Shouldn't .to_eng_string() always return a str? Oleg. -- Oleg Broytmann http://phd.pp.ru/ phd(a)phd.pp.ru Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.

11 39

Removing callable() from the stdlib
by Collin Winter March 29, 2008

March 29, 2008

I've been running 2to3's fix_callable over 2.6's stdlib to remove -3 warnings due to callable() usage; 2to3 replaces callable(x) with has_attr(x, "__call__"). Unfortunately, this breaks code that wants to run callable() on old-style classes (like test_builtin), because old-style classes don't have a __call__ attribute (new-style classes do, however). How should this be handled? I'm tempted to just add __call__ to old-style classes for 2.6, but Neal Norwitz thought that might break some user … [View More]

2 2

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] the release gods are angry at python
by Neal Norwitz March 29, 2008

March 29, 2008

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Bill Janssen <janssen(a)parc.com> wrote: > > There > > have been other tests that have also been flaky like test_asynchat, > > test_smtplib, test_ssl, test_urllib2net, test_urllibnet, > > test_xmlrpc_net and some of the tests that use networking. > > Some of the *other* tests that use networking, I think you mean. Yes, primarily networking tests. Also things like signals and threading. > Sounds like networking … [View More]

3 3

Summary of Tracker Issues
by Tracker March 29, 2008

March 29, 2008

ACTIVITY SUMMARY (03/21/08 - 03/28/08) Tracker at http://bugs.python.org/ To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue number. Do NOT respond to this message. 1794 open (+40) / 12535 closed (+18) / 14329 total (+58) Open issues with patches: 528 Average duration of open issues: 715 days. Median duration of open issues: 1243 days. Open Issues Breakdown open 1770 (+40) pending 24 ( +0) Issues Created Or Reopened (58) _______________________________ … [View More]

1 0

Windows build bot failure
by Christian Heimes March 28, 2008

March 28, 2008

Some Windows build bots can't compile openssl. The MS assembler fails to assemble a file. I *think* the issue can be fixed by using nasm32 instead of masm. Christian ml /Cp /coff /c /Cx /Zi /Focrypto\sha\asm\s1_win32.obj .\crypto\sha\asm\s1_win32.asm Microsoft (R) Macro Assembler Version 7.10.6030 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Assembling: .\crypto\sha\asm\s1_win32.asm ml /Cp /coff /c /Cx /Zi /Focrypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.obj .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm … [View More]Microsoft (R) Macro Assembler Version 7.10.6030 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Assembling: .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(29) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(30) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(31) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(32) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(35) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(36) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(37) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(38) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(125) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(138) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(151) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(154) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(155) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(156) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(278) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(279) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(280) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(281) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(282) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(283) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(284) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(285) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(286) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(287) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(288) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD .\crypto\sha\asm\sha512-sse2.asm(289) : error A2006: undefined symbol : XMMWORD NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'ml' : return code '0x1' Stop. Executing ms\d32.mak failed 2 Build log was saved at "file://s:\buildbots\python\2.5.nelson-windows\build\PCbuild\x86-temp-debug\_ssl\BuildLog.htm" _ssl - 27 error(s), 0 warning(s) [View Less]

2 1

How we can get rid of eggs for 2.6 and beyond
by Phillip J. Eby March 28, 2008

March 28, 2008

So, after having some time to absorb the Python-Dev threads about setuptools, bootstrap, and all the rest, I think I see an opportunity to let people route around the "damage" of eggs, while still making it possible for the people who want to use easy_install or to put dependencies in their setup.py to get what they want, too. (And without them needing to install eggs, either.) At the same time, we can address the issues that remain around uninstalling packages, system vs. user … [View More]packages, PYTHONPATH and site.py woes, and really pretty much every other complaint I've heard in the last few days about setuptools stomping on other people's stuff. (Even Paul's Windows issues, hopefully.) Now, you might be asking, "Okay, so why are you telling me about this? Why not just go fix setuptools?" Well, I *can't*. Not without some help from Python-Dev and the Distutils-SIG, to create an updated standard for installed package metadata, by updating PEP 262 ("A Database of Installed Python Packages") to include input from the system packaging folks, support for namespace packages, and support for setuptools-compatible dependency information. What's that got to do with anything? Well, without it, setuptools can't support uninstall or conflict management without using eggs to compartmentalize the installed files. And because it has to use eggs to do *that*, it has to munge .pth files and install its own site.py when installing to PYTHONPATH. All of this ugliness follows directly from the absence of a PEP 262-style installation database. Sure, setuptools could create its own version of this, and I almost did that four years ago. (If you look at the "open issues" part of PEP 262, you'll see my comments from back then.) I decided not to for two reasons: first, the distutils didn't support it yet, so it didn't help for conflict detection and avoidance in the real world at that point. Second, there were no uninstall tools for it, so I'd have had to write one myself. (Zed's "easy_f'ing_uninstall" to the contrary, it ain't easy, and I have an aversion to deleting stuff on people's systems without knowing what will break. There's a big difference between them typing 'rm -rf' themselves, and me doing it.) However, if tools exist and are distributed for such a "database", and *everybody* agrees to use it as an officially-blessed standard, then it should be possible for setuptools to co-exist with that framework, and we're all happy campers. In particular, the "installing eggs sucks" camp should be happy, because it'll be possible for me (or anyone else) to write a version of easy_install that doesn't install eggs any more, and setuptools-based packages can go back to having "setup.py install" install things the old way by default. So, to accomplish this, we (for some value of "we") need to: 1. Hash out consensus around what changes or enhancements are needed to PEP 262, to resolve the previously-listed open issues, those that have come up since (namespace packages, dependency specifications, canonical name/version forms), and anything else that comes up. 2. Update or replace the implementation as appropriate, and modify the distutils to support it in Python 2.6 and beyond. And "support it" means, "ensure that 'install' and *all* bdist commands update the database". The bdist_rpm, bdist_wininst, and bdist_msi commands, even bdist_dumb. (This should probably also include the add/remove programs stuff in the Windows case.) 3. Create a document for system packagers referencing the PEP and introducing them to what/why/how of the standard, in case they weren't one of the original participants in creating this. It will probably take some non-trivial work to do all this for Python 2.6, but it's probably possible, if we start now. I don't think it's critical to have an uninstall tool distributed with 2.6, as long as there's a reasonable way to bootstrap its installation later. Questions, comments... volunteers? :) [View Less]

25 64

Commit access request
by Benjamin Peterson March 28, 2008

March 28, 2008

Hi Python devs, I have been contributing to since December. (See me first issue on the tracker, #1828; it was a major learning experience.) :P In that time, I have contributed many patches and actively participated on this list. This will enable me to help triage bugs on the tracker, something I've been wanting to help with. I'm willing to field questions. -- Thanks for your consideration, Benjamin Peterson

3 6

the release gods are angry at python
by Neal Norwitz March 28, 2008

March 28, 2008

The next releases of 2.6/3.0 are planned for April 2, just over a week from now. There is much work that needs to be done. The buildbots are in a pretty sad state and the gods are seeing too much red. http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/stable/ http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/ See my other mail that discusses the stable buildbots. The criteria for release is that all the stable buildbots are passing all the tests. So we really gotta get these green before Barry notices. You don'… [View More]

9 10