My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night for the merkins), and a release the following Thursday (the 20th). Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one. As per normal, I'll be on #python-dev on freenode for the next two weeks or so. Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <anthony@interlink.com.au> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
Anthony Baxter <anthony@interlink.com.au> writes:
My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night for the merkins), and a release the following Thursday (the 20th).
You mean May, presumably? Cheers, mwh -- In short, just business as usual in the wacky world of floating point <wink>. -- Tim Peters, comp.lang.python
Anthony Baxter <anthony@interlink.com.au> writes:
My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night
On Tuesday 04 May 2004 01:29 pm, Michael Hudson wrote:
You mean May, presumably?
We just let the Aussies *think* they're a few hours ahead of us, but it looks like the truth is out... -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> PythonLabs at Zope Corporation
[Anthony Baxter]
My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night ^^May in North America <wink> for the merkins), and a release the following Thursday (the 20th).
Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one.
I tried to ask about 2.3.4 plans earlier here today, but because I used a different account to mail to python-dev, it's still sitting in a moderator queue. The same msg can be found here: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2004-May/022838.html Short course is that a serious bug with threads on Linux was reported almost a year ago, against Python 2.2.2: http://www.python.org/sf/756924 but wasn't properly diagnosed before last night (by Andrew Langmead; he added his diagnosis to the Python bug report today). I know this affects the OP, and affects Zope on Linux systems using LinuxThreads (but not those using NPTL). I don't know whether anyone is actively pursuing a workaround. If someone is, or if a LinuxHead on python-dev wants to, I think it's important to squash this bug in 2.3.4. I don't have any other 2.3.4 issues in mind.
On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 01:47:28PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2004-May/022838.html
Short course is that a serious bug with threads on Linux was reported almost a year ago, against Python 2.2.2:
I have a patch that seems to fix things <http://world.std.com/~aml/python/linuxthreads-patch/linuxthreads.diffs> and a c program to test for LinuxThreads behavior that would be suitable for autoconf <http://world.std.com/~aml/python/linuxthreads-patch/test.c> I just need a bit of time testing the test suite changes for how they run on other platforms, and to integrate the test program into configure.in. It puts all the changes into a REDIRECT_SIGNALS_TO_MAIN_THREAD define, so there should be any effect on other platforms.
Anthony Baxter wrote: Hi Anthony, hi Python-Dev!
My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night for the merkins), and a release the following Thursday (the 20th).
this is likely to be the final 2.3 release
Is it possible to include the patch #945642 in 2.3.4? If not, this would mean that *no version Python of 2.3(.x)* was ever able to handle nonblocking SSL socket connections properly (what the former Python-Versions 2.x could). See: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=945642&group_id=5470 Cheers, Tino
On Wed, 5 May 2004, Anthony Baxter wrote: [...]
Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one. [...]
Could somebody apply this before the 2.3 freeze? http://www.python.org/sf/851736 Trivial fix to an obviously-broken class, has been sitting there, with test, for some months. John
Hello Anthony,
Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one.
I'd like to include some of the proposed gettext improvements into that candidate, but I'm not sure I'll get the necessary time, since we're in a rush for a new distribution release. Will try to prepare a patch in the weekend. -- Gustavo Niemeyer http://niemeyer.net
Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one.
I'd like to include some of the proposed gettext improvements into that candidate, but I'm not sure I'll get the necessary time, since we're in a rush for a new distribution release. Will try to prepare a patch in the weekend.
Huh? We're talking about a bugfix release for 2.3 here. Not a good time for improvements, which sounds to me like a euphemism for new features, not for bug fixes. Even if they are backwards compatible, I'm still -1 on adding new features to a bugfix release. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Huh? We're talking about a bugfix release for 2.3 here. Not a good time for improvements, which sounds to me like a euphemism for new features, not for bug fixes.
Adding a gettext compatible lgettext() might be a good thing, as well as bind_textdomain_codeset() (which pygtk users certainly have missed already) but I have to admit this is not a bug fix per se.
Even if they are backwards compatible, I'm still -1 on adding new features to a bugfix release.
Acknowledged. Will prepare a patch for the next major asap. -- Gustavo Niemeyer http://niemeyer.net
Huh? We're talking about a bugfix release for 2.3 here. Not a good time for improvements, which sounds to me like a euphemism for new features, not for bug fixes.
Adding a gettext compatible lgettext() might be a good thing, as well as bind_textdomain_codeset() (which pygtk users certainly have missed already) but I have to admit this is not a bug fix per se.
Definitely -1 for 2.3.4.
Even if they are backwards compatible, I'm still -1 on adding new features to a bugfix release.
Acknowledged. Will prepare a patch for the next major asap.
Sure, if that's what Barry agreed to. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Acknowledged. Will prepare a patch for the next major asap.
Sure, if that's what Barry agreed to.
I said I'm going to prepare a patch. After that, I'll ask for comments on this list. That's what I have always done about things I'm not sure about, and that's what I would do even if you hadn't mentioned the 2.3.4 issue. -- Gustavo Niemeyer http://niemeyer.net
On Wed, 2004-05-05 at 19:16, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Even if they are backwards compatible, I'm still -1 on adding new features to a bugfix release.
Acknowledged. Will prepare a patch for the next major asap.
Sure, if that's what Barry agreed to.
Martin and I are on the same page about this: no change to the existing API, but +1 on adding new functions to provide the desired feature. You can assign a patch to me, but be sure it includes documentation and unit tests. -Barry
My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night for the merkins), and a release the following Thursday (the 20th).
Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one.
Either you meant May or that mail spent a really long time in some mail queue... ;-) One thing I'd love to see backported to 2.3.4 is the fix to platform.py to properly recognize Windows XP when win32 is detected. Mind if I backport this one personally? --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Guido van Rossum wrote:
My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night for the merkins), and a release the following Thursday (the 20th).
Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one.
Either you meant May or that mail spent a really long time in some mail queue... ;-)
Yes, I meant May.
One thing I'd love to see backported to 2.3.4 is the fix to platform.py to properly recognize Windows XP when win32 is detected. Mind if I backport this one personally?
Go for it. -- Anthony Baxter <anthony@interlink.com.au> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
Guido van Rossum wrote:
My plan is to cut a release candidate for 2.3.4 next Thursday (13th April) Australian time (so Wednesday night for the merkins), and a release the following Thursday (the 20th).
Can we say that the 2.3 branch is frozen from Tuesday? As this is likely to be the final 2.3 release (modulo any suprising new bugs), I'd like the time to try and nail this one.
Either you meant May or that mail spent a really long time in some mail queue... ;-)
One thing I'd love to see backported to 2.3.4 is the fix to platform.py to properly recognize Windows XP when win32 is detected. Mind if I backport this one personally?
This should only be a matter of copy the HEAD version to the release branch. Note that the HEAD version is slightly different from the one on the 2.3 branch - I haven't backported the cache changes I made. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, May 05 2004)
Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ... http://zope.egenix.com/ mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/
EuroPython 2004, Göteborg, Sweden 32 days left ::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,FreeBSD for free ! ::::
This should only be a matter of copy the HEAD version to the release branch. Note that the HEAD version is slightly different from the one on the 2.3 branch - I haven't backported the cache changes I made.
OK, done. The cache fix is now in 2.3.4 too. Note to Brett C and Raymond H: one of you added a call to reversed() to platform.py; that's a no-no since the source code needs to remain compatible with 1.5.2, per a comment in the source. I've added platform.py to PEP 291. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Guido van Rossum wrote:
This should only be a matter of copy the HEAD version to the release branch. Note that the HEAD version is slightly different from the one on the 2.3 branch - I haven't backported the cache changes I made.
OK, done. The cache fix is now in 2.3.4 too.
Thanks.
Note to Brett C and Raymond H: one of you added a call to reversed() to platform.py; that's a no-no since the source code needs to remain compatible with 1.5.2, per a comment in the source. I've added platform.py to PEP 291.
-- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, May 06 2004)
Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ... http://zope.egenix.com/ mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/
EuroPython 2004, Göteborg, Sweden 31 days left ::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,FreeBSD for free ! ::::
participants (11)
-
Andrew M. Langmead -
Anthony Baxter -
Barry Warsaw -
Fred L. Drake, Jr. -
Guido van Rossum -
Gustavo Niemeyer -
John J Lee -
M.-A. Lemburg -
Michael Hudson -
Tim Peters -
Tino Lange