I didn't see any replies to the last post, so I'll ask again with a better subject line - as I said last time, as far as I'm aware, I'm not aware of anyone having done a fix for the issue Tim identified ( http://www.python.org/sf/1069160 ) So, my question is: Is this important enough to delay a 2.4 final for? My plan is currently to release it _this_ _Tuesday_, so I really need an answer soon... I've attached Tim's original message at the end here. At the moment, I'm inclined to say "if it's not fixed, it won't kill us". But that's admittedly my own biases - threading bugs annoy me <wink> I'm happy to defer to more knowlegable types, though - is this so bad that it merits delaying the release? I can't make time to look at it before then - I'm still writing slides for a couple of talks at OSDC. Anthony From: Tim Peters <tim.peters@gmail.com> To: Python Dev <python-dev@python.org> Date: 2004-11-19 13:08 This one is a puzzler. See http://www.python.org/sf/1069160 for details. The short course is that the PyThreadState_SetAsyncExc() implementation fell into a common trap, and can cause segfaults under rare conditions (like every other Python thread segfault bug we've ever had). This is easily repaired (although I've got no interest in doing the coding, or even in contriving a test case -- this was an obvious "by eyeball" bug). The puzzle is how to treat this wrt 2.4. Since it's a critical bug, I suppose it "should" force another release candidate. OTOH, this is a C-only API (there's no exposure from Python) that's never used in the core. We could add code to make it segfault every time <wink>, and nothing in the distribution would notice. OTOH, if we broke its intended behavior while fixing the bug, we'd never know that either. "Never used in the core" means never -- the function isn't tested. On the third hand, it's a simple function with an obvious segfault mode that has an obvious fix. I'll leave it to the release manager <wink>.