Re: [Python-Dev] 2.5.1 plans
It would be nice if this simple fix could be included (main branch and 2.5.1):
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1598181&group_id=5470&atid=105470
[ 1598181 ] subprocess.py: O(N**2) bottleneck
I submitted the trivial fix almost two months ago, but apparently nobody feels responsible...
Ralf
----- Original Message ----
From: Neal Norwitz
On 1/4/07, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve
It would be nice if this simple fix could be included (main branch and 2.5.1):
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1598181&group_id=5470&atid=105470
[ 1598181 ] subprocess.py: O(N**2) bottleneck
I submitted the trivial fix almost two months ago, but apparently nobody feels responsible...
I just reviewed the patch, which should help it get accepted. -Mike
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:22:54AM -0800, Mike Klaas wrote:
[ 1598181 ] subprocess.py: O(N**2) bottleneck
I submitted the trivial fix almost two months ago, but apparently nobody feels responsible...
Is Peter Astrand still actively maintaining the module? I've been assigning subprocess bugs to him on the theory that he'll fix them. If he's not around, we can apply patches to subprocess. (The problem with subprocess in particular would be the difficulty of testing changes that affect both Windows and POSIX code; I think relatively few developers use both Windows and Unix.) We should also try to make an effort to go through the tracker and look for bug fixes and patches suitable for 2.5.1. --amk
On 1/4/07, A.M. Kuchling
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:22:54AM -0800, Mike Klaas wrote:
[ 1598181 ] subprocess.py: O(N**2) bottleneck
I submitted the trivial fix almost two months ago, but apparently nobody feels responsible...
Is Peter Astrand still actively maintaining the module? I've been assigning subprocess bugs to him on the theory that he'll fix them. If he's not around, we can apply patches to subprocess. (The problem with subprocess in particular would be the difficulty of testing changes that affect both Windows and POSIX code; I think relatively few developers use both Windows and Unix.)
We have the buildbots to help with this.
We should also try to make an effort to go through the tracker and look for bug fixes and patches suitable for 2.5.1.
Definitely! I only did a really quick review. If you want someone to think about any of these, assign them to me with a priority of 9. I'll discuss with others and see if the fixes should go in to 2.5.1 or not. n
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 01:47:13PM -0800, Neal Norwitz wrote:
We have the buildbots to help with this.
According to http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/trunk/ we do not have a single working XP or Cygwin buildbot right now.
Definitely! I only did a really quick review. If you want someone to think about any of these, assign them to me with a priority of 9. I'll discuss with others and see if the fixes should go in to 2.5.1 or not.
Bug #1599254 is the most critical for me (possible data loss with mailbox.py); I'll try to fix it for 2.5.1. I've changed its priority but not reassigned it. Should the fix for bug #1552726 (interactive Python polls every 1/10 sec) be applied to 2.5.1? It's already been applied to trunk. The bug was noted by an OLPC person, but I don't think this bug is really very critical for them. Maybe we should ask them. I've bumped the priority as a reminder; if we decide to not apply it to 2.5.1, the bug can be closed. --amk
participants (4)
-
A.M. Kuchling -
Mike Klaas -
Neal Norwitz -
Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve