Jack Jansen Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com writes:
On donderdag, apr 17, 2003, at 22:17 Europe/Amsterdam, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I'd like to do a 2.3b1 release someday. Maybe at the end of next week, that would be Friday April 25. If anyone has something that needs to be done before this release go out, please let me know!
The getargs mods got checked in just this morning, even though I explicitly and rather strongly asked that if these mods be made they be checked in *long* before a release was due:-(
Sorry, I forgot. Did you make a note of that on the SF patch?
Yes, I'm pretty sure I did. Thomas also seems to refer to it...
He did, and I also mentioned it yesterday. OTOH, I had sitting a first version of the patch on SF for a rather long time (shortly after the alpha2 release), asking for feedback, but didn't get any.
This means that all the Mac modules are now 100% dead. The same is probably true for PyObjC. And PyObjC has the added problem that it needs to be compatible with both 2.3b1 and 2.2 (notice that that is "2.2", not "2.2.X": PyObjC has to work with /usr/bin/python that Apple ships, which is 2.2 at the moment). I assume there are format codes that will convert 16 bit and 32 bit integer quantities without any checks on both 2.2 and 2.3, but I haven't investigated yet.
Maybe we should retract the changes to existing format codes that make them more restrictive? That should revive any code that's curerntly dead, right?
That would be much better. if "l" (lower case ell) would continue to accept anything I wouldn't have to change anything.
Guido has also suggested to keep another code without changes, I cannot remember which one it was, but there is a comment on SF.
I have the impression that the new test_getargs2.py test makes it easy to change the behaviour and verify it to anything we want.
In case it is too much trouble, why not backout all this again (although someone else would have to do it, I'm basically offline until tuesday), and check in after the b1 release.