[Python-3000] Py3k release schedule worries

[Guido van Rossum]

On 12/19/06, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On 12/19/06, Adam Olsen <rhamph at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 12/18/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > > character, but AFAICT it fizzled; nobody has proposed to help with
> > > getting the int unification branch, which is mostly done but still has
> > > 22 failing tests last time I looked. I've received a few contributions
> >
> > > I'd also like to see people volunteer to help with the implementation
> > > of some of these projects, and with the implementation of projects
> > > that already have a PEP or don't need one. For example:
> > >
> > > - finishing the int unification branch
> >
> > Who should I conspire with to get this done?
>
> Martin v. Loewis did all of the initial work on the int unification branch.
> He would be the best person to directly talk with.  I am pretty sure he
> reads this mailing list regularly.

Alternatively, if you have a patch, use the SF patch manager and
assign it to me, and I'll take it on right away.

> >   I've already tracked
> > down one of the bugs: convert_to_double in floatobject.c prefers
> > PyInt_AS_LONG, assuming it can't fail, which is no longer true.
> >
> > >>> 5.0 * 9999999999999
> > -5.0
> > >>> 1.0 + 999999999999
> > 0.0
> >
> > What is the policy on working on the p3yk branch?
>
> It's considered just like any other branch in Python.
>
> >   I thought I read
> > that we should skip bug reports, but I've been unable to find the
> > email saying so.
>
> Not that I know of.  There is a Python 3000 group on SF.  We just don't want
> people reporting bugs saying that there code doesn't work on that branch.
> But reporting bugs like this where new stuff is not working as it should can
> be reported.  It just doesn't hurt (for now) to say here you found the bug
> as well as not that many people are hacking on the p3yk branch.
>
> -Brett


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)