From jcea at jcea.es  Thu Jul  2 16:39:50 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:39:50 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to "release26-maint"?
Message-ID: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I have found a few flaws in 2.6 documentation. I was going to correct
them when I found they are already solved in trunk in r69846, done by
mark.dickinson in february.

Is there any reason for that commit not to be merged to 2.6 branch?. Am
I missing anything?.

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSkzGsJlgi5GaxT1NAQIJBwP8C5nnSw5wKjlM/2y5UtS96kbvGipC6EFV
9cbxF3s6vJOGbDqKdgm6VMz82DNIsIw7YhUDw2ACB9Q/HGAwno5u56/eVXCfA53N
uDGYyQ76Ebty2HqbEdcve3n5UH6/2O5Yd3koFpaBm0/UrA/DayFSNAKyqGL3pNZq
To6p6r/0ots=
=jMbT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From benjamin at python.org  Thu Jul  2 16:43:19 2009
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 09:43:19 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>

2009/7/2 Jesus Cea <jcea at jcea.es>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I have found a few flaws in 2.6 documentation. I was going to correct
> them when I found they are already solved in trunk in r69846, done by
> mark.dickinson in february.
>
> Is there any reason for that commit not to be merged to 2.6 branch?. Am
> I missing anything?.

People usually don't merge documentation changes because it's more
trouble than it's worth. You can merge that one, though.



-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

From anthonybaxter at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 16:58:24 2009
From: anthonybaxter at gmail.com (Anthony Baxter)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 00:58:24 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>

Speaking as a past release manager, the reason that things like that didn't
get merged is because... drumroll... no-one merged them.
It's another tree to checkout and patch. Personally, I was always of the
belief that if someone wanted to fix docs (or comments, or other things like
that) in a maintenance branch, more power to them.



On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org>wrote:

> 2009/7/2 Jesus Cea <jcea at jcea.es>:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > I have found a few flaws in 2.6 documentation. I was going to correct
> > them when I found they are already solved in trunk in r69846, done by
> > mark.dickinson in february.
> >
> > Is there any reason for that commit not to be merged to 2.6 branch?. Am
> > I missing anything?.
>
> People usually don't merge documentation changes because it's more
> trouble than it's worth. You can merge that one, though.
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Benjamin
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090703/1b65039e/attachment.htm>

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Thu Jul  2 17:06:50 2009
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 11:06:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021103460.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 00:58, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> Speaking as a past release manager, the reason that things like that didn't
> get merged is because... drumroll... no-one merged them.
> It's another tree to checkout and patch. Personally, I was always of the
> belief that if someone wanted to fix docs (or comments, or other things like
> that) in a maintenance branch, more power to them.

What I do is accumulate a list of doc fixes I've made, and when the
list gets to some undefined size or age, I merge them all in one
svnmerge batch.  I think Georg does something similar.

--David

From jcea at jcea.es  Thu Jul  2 17:15:16 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:15:16 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anthony Baxter wrote:
> Speaking as a past release manager, the reason that things like that
> didn't get merged is because... drumroll... no-one merged them.

Ughhh. This is actually a good reason to migrate to mercurial, were
merges are painless :-).

> It's another tree to checkout and patch. Personally, I was always of the
> belief that if someone wanted to fix docs (or comments, or other things
> like that) in a maintenance branch, more power to them.

I already have the checkouts for the maintained branches. I will try to
merge that patch, although it is old and will probably generate a ton of
conflicts. Let's see...

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSkzO+5lgi5GaxT1NAQLUFwP/QfS/U20tSS1Xd6P9nm3V2OADxOs9aFSK
TEpluTRSZ3o3E8GoXGjx1BBns3rffM7+VSIIvnlzujzTF9r4nUxy26TNjDKBnZ9j
aByQAtJVY2FY3nYYIxZ1SJn1w4HWBtueckZV5fCZmMRpLWEQSwfbVFIq3+6IHwC2
xCVByx9x+yI=
=SvWZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From asmodai at in-nomine.org  Thu Jul  2 17:22:27 2009
From: asmodai at in-nomine.org (Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 17:22:27 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
 "release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>

-On [20090702 17:15], Jesus Cea (jcea at jcea.es) wrote:
>Ughhh. This is actually a good reason to migrate to mercurial, were
>merges are painless :-).

For all I know Mercurial doesn't make the issue of resolving content merges
easier, so that would make your comment moot.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
????? ?????? ??? ?? ??????
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
When you do something, you should burn yourself completely, like a good
bonfire, leaving no trace of yourself...

From benjamin at python.org  Thu Jul  2 17:23:41 2009
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:23:41 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
Message-ID: <1afaf6160907020823k2d93a84rf50cdad50fd4d038@mail.gmail.com>

2009/7/2 Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai at in-nomine.org>:
> -On [20090702 17:15], Jesus Cea (jcea at jcea.es) wrote:
>>Ughhh. This is actually a good reason to migrate to mercurial, were
>>merges are painless :-).
>
> For all I know Mercurial doesn't make the issue of resolving content merges
> easier, so that would make your comment moot.

They're about 2^987987979 times faster, though than with svnmerge.py.



-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

From jcea at jcea.es  Thu Jul  2 17:40:56 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:40:56 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <1afaf6160907020823k2d93a84rf50cdad50fd4d038@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<1afaf6160907020823k2d93a84rf50cdad50fd4d038@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4CD508.6030901@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2009/7/2 Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai at in-nomine.org>:
>> -On [20090702 17:15], Jesus Cea (jcea at jcea.es) wrote:
>>> Ughhh. This is actually a good reason to migrate to mercurial, were
>>> merges are painless :-).
>> For all I know Mercurial doesn't make the issue of resolving content merges
>> easier, so that would make your comment moot.
> 
> They're about 2^987987979 times faster, though than with svnmerge.py.

And you don't forget any merge, because you commit to the maintenance
and then merge to the trunk.

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSkzVBJlgi5GaxT1NAQLXrQP/atOdGpe5bidVWexezSOQAq9Zzkgf8pd6
4lDzQqxvDF8K2TeMNT7s4EXib0OQGLxP/jjtp+Tupb/e0oMu8t9wFNrdhJsatNyR
SCyLlfvk/lr5aAFeFGwwZOkMcudqfhPXbq3CEmz3g0dchnITqEqSN1xv2K6YUZJe
qdIoBOCUt4U=
=OYEB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From anthonybaxter at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 18:13:17 2009
From: anthonybaxter at gmail.com (Anthony Baxter)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 02:13:17 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
Message-ID: <e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>

The particulars of the revision control system don't matter as much as the
discipline of teaching people to commit fixes. Right now, we have 2.6.x,
3.0.x and 3.1.x.

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:22 AM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <
asmodai at in-nomine.org> wrote:

> -On [20090702 17:15], Jesus Cea (jcea at jcea.es) wrote:
> >Ughhh. This is actually a good reason to migrate to mercurial, were
> >merges are painless :-).
>
> For all I know Mercurial doesn't make the issue of resolving content merges
> easier, so that would make your comment moot.
>
> --
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
> ????? ?????? ??? ?? ??????
> http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
> When you do something, you should burn yourself completely, like a good
> bonfire, leaving no trace of yourself...
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090703/49c0f91b/attachment.htm>

From brett at python.org  Thu Jul  2 19:56:43 2009
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:56:43 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>

2009/7/2 Anthony Baxter <anthonybaxter at gmail.com>

> The particulars of the revision control system don't matter as much as the
> discipline of teaching people to commit fixes. Right now, we have 2.6.x,
> 3.0.x and 3.1.x.
>

If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that 3.0
is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with another
point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't introduce any new
syntax or tweak semantics.


>
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:22 AM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <
> asmodai at in-nomine.org> wrote:
>
>> -On [20090702 17:15], Jesus Cea (jcea at jcea.es) wrote:
>> >Ughhh. This is actually a good reason to migrate to mercurial, were
>> >merges are painless :-).
>>
>> For all I know Mercurial doesn't make the issue of resolving content
>> merges
>> easier, so that would make your comment moot.
>>
>> --
>> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
>> ????? ?????? ??? ?? ??????
>> http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
>> When you do something, you should burn yourself completely, like a good
>> bonfire, leaving no trace of yourself...
>> _______________________________________________
>> python-committers mailing list
>> python-committers at python.org
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/5b21cce7/attachment.htm>

From barry at python.org  Thu Jul  2 20:24:48 2009
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:24:48 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>

On Jul 2, 2009, at 1:56 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:

> If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit  
> that 3.0
> is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with  
> another
> point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't introduce  
> any new
> syntax or tweak semantics.

Right.  There have been rumblings of wanting a 3.0.2, and I could do  
it if the clamor were loud enough, but I still think we don't need one.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/94df2404/attachment.pgp>

From anthonybaxter at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 20:29:25 2009
From: anthonybaxter at gmail.com (Anthony Baxter)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 04:29:25 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>
Message-ID: <e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>

I think Barry should totally cut a completely pointless 3.0.2 release. We
can call it the "homage to 1.6" release.
<god-I've-been-involved-with-python-too-long/>
Anthony


On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:

> On Jul 2, 2009, at 1:56 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>  If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
>> 3.0
>> is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with another
>> point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't introduce any
>> new
>> syntax or tweak semantics.
>>
>
> Right.  There have been rumblings of wanting a 3.0.2, and I could do it if
> the clamor were loud enough, but I still think we don't need one.
>
> -Barry
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090703/7e26be9d/attachment-0001.htm>

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Thu Jul  2 20:34:38 2009
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:34:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021431300.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 02:13, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> The particulars of the revision control system don't matter as much as the
> discipline of teaching people to commit fixes. Right now, we have 2.6.x,
> 3.0.x and 3.1.x.

No, we have 2.7, 2.6, 3.2, and 3.1.

Using svnmerge to commit to three branches in addition to trunk
is...painful.  Because of the (lack of) speed.

--David

From barry at python.org  Thu Jul  2 20:42:23 2009
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:42:23 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>
	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>

On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote:

> I think Barry should totally cut a completely pointless 3.0.2  
> release. We
> can call it the "homage to 1.6" release.

We can code name it "Here Comes Another One" (guess that reference!)

> <god-I've-been-involved-with-python-too-long/>

too-much-monty-python-as-a-child-ly y'rs,
-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/60a21772/attachment.pgp>

From brett at python.org  Thu Jul  2 20:43:48 2009
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 11:43:48 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>
	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com> 
	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:42, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:

> On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
>
>  I think Barry should totally cut a completely pointless 3.0.2 release. We
>> can call it the "homage to 1.6" release.
>>
>
> We can code name it "Here Comes Another One" (guess that reference!)
>
>  <god-I've-been-involved-with-python-too-long/>
>>
>
> too-much-monty-python-as-a-child-ly y'rs


Considering Georg just discovered Fawlty Towers I think we might need to
have required British humour training for all core committers.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/8e1abc61/attachment.htm>

From amk at amk.ca  Thu Jul  2 20:46:42 2009
From: amk at amk.ca (A.M. Kuchling)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:46:42 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021431300.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021431300.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>

On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:34:38PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 02:13, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> Using svnmerge to commit to three branches in addition to trunk
> is...painful.  Because of the (lack of) speed.

Should we push the Mercurial transition higher on the priority list,
then?

--amk

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Thu Jul  2 20:56:17 2009
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:56:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>
	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com> 
	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>
	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021450360.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 at 11:43, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:42, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
>
>> On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
>>
>>  I think Barry should totally cut a completely pointless 3.0.2 release. We
>>> can call it the "homage to 1.6" release.
>>>
>>
>> We can code name it "Here Comes Another One" (guess that reference!)
>>
>>  <god-I've-been-involved-with-python-too-long/>
>>>
>>
>> too-much-monty-python-as-a-child-ly y'rs
>
>
> Considering Georg just discovered Fawlty Towers I think we might need to
> have required British humour training for all core committers.

I can see it now...the TV and movie track at PyCon 2010,
with attendance mandatory for anyone wanting to participate
in the Core sprint...

--David

From brett at python.org  Thu Jul  2 21:03:03 2009
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 12:03:03 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021431300.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net> 
	<20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100907021203k6ba9ab2cy698126de1639292c@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:46, A.M. Kuchling <amk at amk.ca> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:34:38PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 02:13, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> > Using svnmerge to commit to three branches in addition to trunk
> > is...painful.  Because of the (lack of) speed.
>
> Should we push the Mercurial transition higher on the priority list,
> then?


I thought it was already high on the priority list and that Dirkjan was
actively working on the transition.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/c0a8feba/attachment.htm>

From goodger at python.org  Thu Jul  2 21:03:54 2009
From: goodger at python.org (David Goodger)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:03:54 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021450360.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es> <4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> 
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>
	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com> 
	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>
	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com> 
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021450360.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <4335d2c40907021203m3421125dsa3b5cc1bacd7b62b@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 14:56, R. David Murray<rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
> I can see it now...the TV and movie track at PyCon 2010,
> with attendance mandatory for anyone wanting to participate
> in the Core sprint...

We actually had a room or two for evening videos at a PyCon (both?) in
Dallas. Somebody brought the boxed set of the Flying Circus show and
had it running. I fondly recall processing email while chuckling...

It wasn't very well attended though.

-- 
David Goodger <http://python.net/~goodger>

From martin at v.loewis.de  Thu Jul  2 21:04:34 2009
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:04:34 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not
	merged	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021431300.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
	<20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>
Message-ID: <4A4D04C2.4010601@v.loewis.de>

>> Using svnmerge to commit to three branches in addition to trunk
>> is...painful.  Because of the (lack of) speed.
> 
> Should we push the Mercurial transition higher on the priority list,
> then?

That's one of the typical "we" questions... Currently, there is a single
person working on that transition, so progress is naturally slow.

Regards,
Martin

From martin at v.loewis.de  Thu Jul  2 21:01:35 2009
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiB2LiBMw7Z3aXMi?=)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:01:35 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>

>     The particulars of the revision control system don't matter as much
>     as the discipline of teaching people to commit fixes. Right now, we
>     have 2.6.x, 3.0.x and 3.1.x. 
> 
> 
> If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
> 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
> another point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't
> introduce any new syntax or tweak semantics.

Unfortunately, that decision was never communicated to the committers,
or, for that matter, to people present at the language summit :-(

So people have continued to merge to 3.0. I think they deserve a 3.0.2
release.

Regards,
Martin

From brett at python.org  Thu Jul  2 22:09:49 2009
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 13:09:49 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:01, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:

> >     The particulars of the revision control system don't matter as much
> >     as the discipline of teaching people to commit fixes. Right now, we
> >     have 2.6.x, 3.0.x and 3.1.x.
> >
> >
> > If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
> > 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
> > another point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't
> > introduce any new syntax or tweak semantics.
>
> Unfortunately, that decision was never communicated to the committers,
> or, for that matter, to people present at the language summit :-(
>

Sorry about that.


>
> So people have continued to merge to 3.0. I think they deserve a 3.0.2
> release.


If Barry is up for it I am not against it, but if we do go with it I think
it should be a quickie release and then retire 3.0.x completely.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/c4e3389e/attachment.htm>

From barry at python.org  Thu Jul  2 22:19:29 2009
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 16:19:29 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C8448202-DD24-4A1A-BB47-83705796811E@python.org>

On Jul 2, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:

> If Barry is up for it I am not against it, but if we do go with it I  
> think it should be a quickie release and then retire 3.0.x completely.

It's not difficult to actually cut the release.  What is a pain is  
managing all the bugs leading up to it.  If we announce that we're  
going to do a 3.0.2, people who thought 3.0 was dead may ask for their  
favorite bug fix to be backported, etc.

If we're going to do one, then we'll need to schedule it and give  
people a chance to actually commit to it for a few weeks.  We may even  
need to do release candidates.

TBH, I'm not sure there's enough interest in doing it.  We're not  
recommending people actually /use/ 3.0, and I know for one data point  
that Ubuntu doesn't care.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/fb948868/attachment.pgp>

From martin at v.loewis.de  Thu Jul  2 22:47:34 2009
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 22:47:34 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <C8448202-DD24-4A1A-BB47-83705796811E@python.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
	<C8448202-DD24-4A1A-BB47-83705796811E@python.org>
Message-ID: <4A4D1CE6.4080005@v.loewis.de>

> TBH, I'm not sure there's enough interest in doing it.

Then announce, to the widest public possible, that there will not
be a 3.0.2 release ever. It's just that the status quo is unsatisfying.

Regards,
Martin

From dickinsm at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 22:49:06 2009
From: dickinsm at gmail.com (Mark Dickinson)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 21:49:06 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <5c6f2a5d0907021349w4a5522c7j94271d48b1ac9b83@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 8:01 PM, "Martin v. L?wis"<martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> [Brett]
>> If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
>> 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
>> another point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't
>> introduce any new syntax or tweak semantics.
>
> Unfortunately, that decision was never communicated to the committers,
> or, for that matter, to people present at the language summit :-(
>
> So people have continued to merge to 3.0. I think they deserve a 3.0.2
> release.

Speaking as one of the people who occasionally remembers to backport
to 3.0 (though clearly I failed with r69846), it wouldn't bother me at all
if there were no 3.0.2.  I can't speak for any of the other backporters, of
course.

I'm not really sure who 3.0.2 would be useful for.

Mark

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 23:13:03 2009
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 07:13:03 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <5c6f2a5d0907021349w4a5522c7j94271d48b1ac9b83@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<5c6f2a5d0907021349w4a5522c7j94271d48b1ac9b83@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4D22DF.6080203@gmail.com>

Mark Dickinson wrote:
> Speaking as one of the people who occasionally remembers to backport
> to 3.0 (though clearly I failed with r69846), it wouldn't bother me at all
> if there were no 3.0.2.  I can't speak for any of the other backporters, of
> course.
> 
> I'm not really sure who 3.0.2 would be useful for.

I agree with what Mark has said above (it also means I can just svn
switch my 3.0 checkout to 3.1 rather than adding a 5th local working copy).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------

From python at rcn.com  Fri Jul  3 00:21:19 2009
From: python at rcn.com (Raymond Hettinger)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:21:19 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to"release26-maint"?
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es><1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org><e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>


> So people have continued to merge to 3.0. I think they deserve a 3.0.2 release.

I'm one of those people who have backported fixes to 3.0, but I do not want
a 3.0.2 to go out now thet 3.1 has been released.  The latest version should
not get upstaged.  Essentially, 3.1 is what 3.0.x should have been.  The 3.0.x series 
is defective and needs to die-off and be forgotten.

So, not only would 3.0.2 be a waste of Barry's time, it would be a step backwards.
A while ago, Barry said that 3.0.2 would not happen, so at that point several of
us stopped backporting fixes.  So, 3.0.2 still has known bugs and I think it would 
be a mistake to release it.


Raymond

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/6234e74d/attachment.htm>

From brett at python.org  Fri Jul  3 00:23:57 2009
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:23:57 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com> 
	<C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100907021523y5c013b6ch705d28aea86200e1@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 15:21, Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com> wrote:

>
> > So people have continued to merge to 3.0. I think they deserve a 3.0.2
> release.
>
> I'm one of those people who have backported fixes to 3.0, but I do not want
> a 3.0.2 to go out now thet 3.1 has been released.  The latest version
> should
> not get upstaged.  Essentially, 3.1 is what 3.0.x should have been.  The
> 3.0.x series
> is defective and needs to die-off and be forgotten.
>
> So, not only would 3.0.2 be a waste of Barry's time, it would be a step
> backwards.
> A while ago, Barry said that 3.0.2 would not happen, so at that point
> several of
> us stopped backporting fixes.  So, 3.0.2 still has known bugs and I think
> it would
> be a mistake to release it.
>

Sounds like general consensus that 3.0.2 isn't worth it. Is an announcement
on c.l.p.a and something on www.python.org enough to get the word out that
3.0.2 is not going to happen and 3.0 users should migrate to 3.1?

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/3d5812b8/attachment.htm>

From barry at python.org  Fri Jul  3 00:26:44 2009
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 18:26:44 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021523y5c013b6ch705d28aea86200e1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
	<C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
	<bbaeab100907021523y5c013b6ch705d28aea86200e1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AD6239DD-33A8-458C-BD48-3274B2955F26@python.org>

On Jul 2, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:

> Sounds like general consensus that 3.0.2 isn't worth it. Is an  
> announcement on c.l.p.a and something on www.python.org enough to  
> get the word out that 3.0.2 is not going to happen and 3.0 users  
> should migrate to 3.1?

I will announce this to py-list, py-ann, and update the 3.0 download  
pages.

There will be no 3.0.2.
-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090702/480c3f57/attachment.pgp>

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Fri Jul  3 00:35:45 2009
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 18:35:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not
	merged	to"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <AD6239DD-33A8-458C-BD48-3274B2955F26@python.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
	<C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
	<bbaeab100907021523y5c013b6ch705d28aea86200e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD6239DD-33A8-458C-BD48-3274B2955F26@python.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021834390.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 at 18:26, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jul 2, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>> Sounds like general consensus that 3.0.2 isn't worth it. Is an announcement 
>> on c.l.p.a and something on www.python.org enough to get the word out that 
>> 3.0.2 is not going to happen and 3.0 users should migrate to 3.1?
>
> I will announce this to py-list, py-ann, and update the 3.0 download pages.
>
> There will be no 3.0.2.

+1

(I'm one of the other people who was backporting things until recently.)

--David

From christian at cheimes.de  Fri Jul  3 01:14:28 2009
From: christian at cheimes.de (Christian Heimes)
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 01:14:28 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not
	merged	to"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <AD6239DD-33A8-458C-BD48-3274B2955F26@python.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>	<C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>	<bbaeab100907021523y5c013b6ch705d28aea86200e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD6239DD-33A8-458C-BD48-3274B2955F26@python.org>
Message-ID: <4A4D3F54.7090606@cheimes.de>

Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I will announce this to py-list, py-ann, and update the 3.0 download pages.
> 
> There will be no 3.0.2.

+1 for your decision.

Are there any known incompatibilities that could break a Python 3.0
script on 3.1?

From benjamin at python.org  Fri Jul  3 01:30:39 2009
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 18:30:39 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4D3F54.7090606@cheimes.de>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
	<C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
	<bbaeab100907021523y5c013b6ch705d28aea86200e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD6239DD-33A8-458C-BD48-3274B2955F26@python.org>
	<4A4D3F54.7090606@cheimes.de>
Message-ID: <1afaf6160907021630j35a53750lafe731ec1161c51e@mail.gmail.com>

2009/7/2 Christian Heimes <christian at cheimes.de>:
> Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> I will announce this to py-list, py-ann, and update the 3.0 download pages.
>>
>> There will be no 3.0.2.
>
> +1 for your decision.
>
> Are there any known incompatibilities that could break a Python 3.0
> script on 3.1?

This is the short list:
http://docs.python.org/dev/py3k/whatsnew/3.1.html#porting-to-python-3-1

I'm sure there's a variety of py3k transition problem fixes that break
strict compatibility, though.



-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

From steve at holdenweb.com  Fri Jul  3 02:56:13 2009
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:56:13 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>
	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>
	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4D572D.6030301@holdenweb.com>

Brett Cannon wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:42, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org
> <mailto:barry at python.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> 
>         I think Barry should totally cut a completely pointless 3.0.2
>         release. We
>         can call it the "homage to 1.6" release.
> 
> 
>     We can code name it "Here Comes Another One" (guess that reference!)
> 
> 
>         <god-I've-been-involved-with-python-too-long/>
> 
> 
>     too-much-monty-python-as-a-child-ly y'rs
> 
> 
> Considering Georg just discovered Fawlty Towers I think we might need to
> have required British humour training for all core committers.
> 
It was kind of thrust in our faces at the EuroPython meeting this week.
At dinner the table I was sitting on was entitled "Ministry of Silly
Walks". If ever there's a Python certification it should definitely
involve knowing *something* about that series ;-)

regards
 Steve
-- 
Steve Holden           +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC                 http://www.holdenweb.com/
Watch PyCon on video now!          http://pycon.blip.tv/


From steve at holdenweb.com  Fri Jul  3 02:59:59 2009
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:59:59 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not
	merged	to"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es><1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org><e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
	<C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
Message-ID: <4A4D580F.1060500@holdenweb.com>

Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> 
>> So people have continued to merge to 3.0. I think they deserve a 3.0.2
> release.
> 
> I'm one of those people who have backported fixes to 3.0, but I do not want
> a 3.0.2 to go out now thet 3.1 has been released.  The latest version should
> not get upstaged.  Essentially, 3.1 is what 3.0.x should have been.  The
> 3.0.x series
> is defective and needs to die-off and be forgotten.
>  
> So, not only would 3.0.2 be a waste of Barry's time, it would be a step
> backwards.
> A while ago, Barry said that 3.0.2 would not happen, so at that point
> several of
> us stopped backporting fixes.  So, 3.0.2 still has known bugs and I
> think it would
> be a mistake to release it.
>  
>  

Suggested text for press release:

"""
3.0 is dead. It is pushing up the daisies. It has ceased to be. It is no
more. It has joined the choir invisible. It is an ex-release.
"""

regards
 Steve
-- 
Steve Holden           +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC                 http://www.holdenweb.com/
Watch PyCon on video now!          http://pycon.blip.tv/


From ziade.tarek at gmail.com  Fri Jul  3 10:20:32 2009
From: ziade.tarek at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Tarek_Ziad=E9?=)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 10:20:32 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021834390.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D040F.3060702@v.loewis.de>
	<bbaeab100907021309x755df140r607c2eb515fd3597@mail.gmail.com>
	<C37143DBFB2A4805A6D3EAE4128012B1@RaymondLaptop1>
	<bbaeab100907021523y5c013b6ch705d28aea86200e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD6239DD-33A8-458C-BD48-3274B2955F26@python.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021834390.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <94bdd2610907030120p349e5cc5s675250dd57217d9e@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:35 AM, R. David Murray<rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 at 18:26, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds like general consensus that 3.0.2 isn't worth it. Is an
>>> announcement on c.l.p.a and something on www.python.org enough to get the
>>> word out that 3.0.2 is not going to happen and 3.0 users should migrate to
>>> 3.1?
>>
>> I will announce this to py-list, py-ann, and update the 3.0 download
>> pages.
>>
>> There will be no 3.0.2.
>
> +1
>
> (I'm one of the other people who was backporting things until recently.)

+1 too, looking forward to Mercurial too ;)


Tarek

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Fri Jul  3 11:54:28 2009
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:54:28 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4335d2c40907021203m3421125dsa3b5cc1bacd7b62b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es> <4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>
	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021450360.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
	<4335d2c40907021203m3421125dsa3b5cc1bacd7b62b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <h2kkh6$7e2$1@ger.gmane.org>

David Goodger schrieb:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 14:56, R. David Murray<rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
>> I can see it now...the TV and movie track at PyCon 2010,
>> with attendance mandatory for anyone wanting to participate
>> in the Core sprint...
> 
> We actually had a room or two for evening videos at a PyCon (both?) in
> Dallas. Somebody brought the boxed set of the Flying Circus show and
> had it running. I fondly recall processing email while chuckling...
> 
> It wasn't very well attended though.

There is a slight chance that EuroPython 2011 might come to Germany --
in this case, some kind of Monty Python showing must be arranged.  As
you all know, we really can use the education.

Georg

-- 
Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less.
Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy
indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou
two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.


From christian at cheimes.de  Fri Jul  3 12:18:17 2009
From: christian at cheimes.de (Christian Heimes)
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 12:18:17 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <h2kkh6$7e2$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021450360.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>	<4335d2c40907021203m3421125dsa3b5cc1bacd7b62b@mail.gmail.com>
	<h2kkh6$7e2$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <4A4DDAE9.4090600@cheimes.de>

Georg Brandl schrieb:
> David Goodger schrieb:
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 14:56, R. David Murray<rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
>>> I can see it now...the TV and movie track at PyCon 2010,
>>> with attendance mandatory for anyone wanting to participate
>>> in the Core sprint...
>> We actually had a room or two for evening videos at a PyCon (both?) in
>> Dallas. Somebody brought the boxed set of the Flying Circus show and
>> had it running. I fondly recall processing email while chuckling...
>>
>> It wasn't very well attended though.
> 
> There is a slight chance that EuroPython 2011 might come to Germany --
> in this case, some kind of Monty Python showing must be arranged.  As
> you all know, we really can use the education.

Georg, I suggest that you get a head start by watching these youtube
clips: http://www.youtube.com/user/MontyPython

Are there already plans in which city EP11 might be hosted? You know
Spamalot is playing in Cologne, too. :)

Christian

From amk at amk.ca  Fri Jul  3 21:12:06 2009
From: amk at amk.ca (A.M. Kuchling)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:12:06 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Mysterious uidNNN committers
Message-ID: <20090703191206.GB8240@andrew-kuchlings-macbook.local>

I've been analyzing how much of the Python code is covered
by the contributor agreements in the PSF's possession.

The logs show four mysterious IDs of the form uidNNNN; I'd like to
figure out who two of those IDs were.  (Two of the IDs are gone in
3.1-trunk, so I don't care about them.)

uid26747 has one commit that only affected
Lib/test/test_generators.py.  To me this reads like a Tim Peters
commit message.  Tim, does this seem familiar?

--------------------------------------------------
r21474 | uid26747 | 2001-07-04 18:11:22 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 11 lines

Added a non-recursive implementation of conjoin(), and a Knight's Tour
solver.  In conjunction, they easily found a tour of a 200x200 board:
that's 200**2 == 40,000 levels of backtracking.  Explicitly resumable
generators allow that to be coded as easily as a recursive solver (easier,
actually, because different levels can use level-customized algorithms
without pain), but without blowing the stack.  Indeed, I've never written
an exhaustive Tour solver in any language before that can handle boards so
large ("exhaustive" == guaranteed to find a solution if one exists, as
opposed to probabilistic heuristic approaches; of course, the age of the
universe may be a blip in the time needed!).
--------------------------------------------------

uid56795's commit is to Lib/idlelib/Debugger.py.  Most of the commits
to idlelib around this time are by Kurt Kaiser, but there are a few by
Chui Tey.  (In either case, both of them have signed agreements, so
the code is likely covered.)

r27482 | uid56795 | 2002-07-05 18:05:24 -0400 (Fri, 05 Jul 2002) | 5 lines

Combine OldStackViewer.py with Debugger.py, removing dead code.
M Debugger.py       : Incorporate StackViewer, NamespaceViewer classes
M StackViewer.py    : remove import OldStackViewer
U OldStackViewer.py : remove file
--------------------------------------------------

uid35364 cleaned up two bare except: clauses in Lib/mhlib.py and
rfc822.py.  No idea who this was -- IIRC, Skip did a lot of cleanup
like this -- but the change is hardly the stuff of intellectual
property litigation.

r21470 | uid35364 | 2001-07-04 03:01:29 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 3 lines

Clean up a bare except: clause.

r21471 | uid35364 | 2001-07-04 03:07:33 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 3 lines

Clean up a bare except: clause.
--------------------------------------------------

uid28957's one commit is a regex tweak.  The mention of an SF bug
lets me identify this as probably by Sjoerd Mullender.

r21472 | uid28957 | 2001-07-04 06:15:58 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 5 lines

Fix for SF bug #425868.
We should not depend on two spaces between words, so use the white
space after the to-be-encoded word only as lookahead and don't
actually consume it in the regular expression.
--------------------------------------------------

--amk



From tim.peters at gmail.com  Fri Jul  3 23:19:42 2009
From: tim.peters at gmail.com (Tim Peters)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 17:19:42 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Board] Mysterious uidNNN committers
In-Reply-To: <20090703191206.GB8240@andrew-kuchlings-macbook.local>
References: <20090703191206.GB8240@andrew-kuchlings-macbook.local>
Message-ID: <1f7befae0907031419s73f2a26fgaabdfa0de37dc1ea@mail.gmail.com>

[A.M. Kuchling]
> I've been analyzing how much of the Python code is covered
> by the contributor agreements in the PSF's possession.
>
> The logs show four mysterious IDs of the form uidNNNN; I'd like to
> figure out who two of those IDs were. ?(Two of the IDs are gone in
> 3.1-trunk, so I don't care about them.)
>
> uid26747 has one commit that only affected
> Lib/test/test_generators.py. ?To me this reads like a Tim Peters
> commit message. ?Tim, does this seem familiar?
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> r21474 | uid26747 | 2001-07-04 18:11:22 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 11 lines
>
> Added a non-recursive implementation of conjoin(), and a Knight's Tour
> solver. ...

100% sure that was indeed me.  No idea how it showed up as "uid26747",
though -- that rings no bells at all.

Another mystery, probably related:  there's no record of this checkin
in the pipermail July 2001 python-checkins archive.

> ...

From martin at v.loewis.de  Fri Jul  3 23:55:24 2009
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:55:24 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Board] Mysterious uidNNN committers
In-Reply-To: <1f7befae0907031419s73f2a26fgaabdfa0de37dc1ea@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20090703191206.GB8240@andrew-kuchlings-macbook.local>
	<1f7befae0907031419s73f2a26fgaabdfa0de37dc1ea@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4E7E4C.9090605@v.loewis.de>

>> r21474 | uid26747 | 2001-07-04 18:11:22 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 11 lines
>>
>> Added a non-recursive implementation of conjoin(), and a Knight's Tour
>> solver. ...
> 
> 100% sure that was indeed me.  No idea how it showed up as "uid26747",
> though -- that rings no bells at all.

Try logging into shell.sf.net. You'll need to do

 ssh tim_one,python at shell.sf.net create

these days first. Then run id(1); my guess that it gives
you this number.

Unfortunately, it's difficult to find out what the Unix UIDs
are of the various Python committers, since SF has stopped
using NIS, or any network user database, for that matter.

Regards,
Martin

From jcea at jcea.es  Sat Jul  4 00:25:25 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:25:25 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4E8555.8010303@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anthony Baxter wrote:
> The particulars of the revision control system don't matter as much as
> the discipline of teaching people to commit fixes. Right now, we have
> 2.6.x, 3.0.x and 3.1.x. 

And trunk and py3k.

Having the right technology helps. The merge features of SVN 1.5 are
limited but blessing.

But I don't want to start a flamewar. The issue is already settled.

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSk6FUJlgi5GaxT1NAQKo1wP8DTqberDUsVi8MsauiUFzZdKD8gKNfT0h
OOENt+ardwYdj5h/xw7e2j//h01lBbJEn/fKHumVFBMC4vS2NyuRILgtbjCLFgx0
rj1AVv3lDGtSQdJcffZMTUl0xyRmiHG1K8MXGxnGJe65qv9Uhc0OEI7c6Lk5xeOF
Iq/J8Fw2KEU=
=AO5E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From jcea at jcea.es  Sat Jul  4 00:27:22 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:27:22 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged
	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A4E85CA.5010709@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Brett Cannon wrote:
> If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
> 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
> another point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't
> introduce any new syntax or tweak semantics.

If that is true (I agree with that policy, btw), please confirm
"officially". Can we forget about 3.0 branch?. Can I delete that
checkout from my system?.

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSk6FyZlgi5GaxT1NAQLeugQAmZxcoRkPBSQD1GK722Rz8d18+z5zH7Di
ZfCYJ0T0EFoJQkefmAQKbstcGPglFGahRE4ZvzjhPPKq3KayRlPKdoAQuWWFVgpR
tYPbLNhcmhn+TtfrMFZJvkqahw/VmfRJvA6HiyQFw77iUjTDfPL8Vwa+zfMqZBSF
4+Zzsn8e/I8=
=WsHl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From goodger at python.org  Sat Jul  4 00:32:52 2009
From: goodger at python.org (David Goodger)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 18:32:52 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4E85CA.5010709@jcea.es>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4E85CA.5010709@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <4335d2c40907031532p79a27503t9df5745165f3eae7@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 18:27, Jesus Cea<jcea at jcea.es> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>> If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
>> 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
>> another point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't
>> introduce any new syntax or tweak semantics.
>
> If that is true (I agree with that policy, btw), please confirm
> "officially".

Barry announced it as officially as possible:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2009-July/718561.html

I followed up with a python.org front-page news item & PSF blog entry
(both linking to that message on python-list).

> Can we forget about 3.0 branch?. Can I delete that
> checkout from my system?.

Seems so.

-- 
David Goodger <http://python.net/~goodger>

From jcea at jcea.es  Sat Jul  4 00:34:16 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:34:16 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not
	merged	to	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021431300.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
	<20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>
Message-ID: <4A4E8768.9000706@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Please, somebody fix the reply-to :)

A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:34:38PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
>> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 02:13, Anthony Baxter wrote:
>> Using svnmerge to commit to three branches in addition to trunk
>> is...painful.  Because of the (lack of) speed.
> 
> Should we push the Mercurial transition higher on the priority list,
> then?

Please, do. I can't wait, and my activity is pretty low... (to change soon)

I already asked for the mercurial transition status a few days ago, with
*no* (zero) answers. How is it going?. Can I help in any way?.

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSk6HaJlgi5GaxT1NAQIw7wP/a4JoGH1cPuQHOHE2NBHhIXdQwrnmkNEv
a5k3tX5UN6PmEMsko45ukLREMPVelINb6TatiQpqWGFLcasElQGlMoBOk95LKuiu
VTNVkRfxpaO5BdDo6sz3bnHWanfYanBxD8khXju7K9IR94mzr6NSo01TA1oylEJT
Lz51PJUlq+M=
=WCBo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From brett at python.org  Sat Jul  4 00:34:00 2009
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:34:00 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4E85CA.5010709@jcea.es>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4E85CA.5010709@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100907031534l54f4c500q57620001cbe7d5e0@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 15:27, Jesus Cea <jcea at jcea.es> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
> > 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
> > another point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't
> > introduce any new syntax or tweak semantics.
>
> If that is true (I agree with that policy, btw), please confirm
> "officially". Can we forget about 3.0 branch?. Can I delete that
> checkout from my system?.


It's official.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090703/ec443c1a/attachment.htm>

From brett at python.org  Sat Jul  4 00:42:03 2009
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:42:03 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4E8768.9000706@jcea.es>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com> 
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com> 
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021431300.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net> 
	<20090702184642.GA12354@amk-desktop.matrixgroup.net>
	<4A4E8768.9000706@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100907031542s49eb89edwe3b7e3e94547dfc@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 15:34, Jesus Cea <jcea at jcea.es> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Please, somebody fix the reply-to :)
>
> A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:34:38PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
> >> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 02:13, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> >> Using svnmerge to commit to three branches in addition to trunk
> >> is...painful.  Because of the (lack of) speed.
> >
> > Should we push the Mercurial transition higher on the priority list,
> > then?
>
> Please, do. I can't wait, and my activity is pretty low... (to change soon)
>
> I already asked for the mercurial transition status a few days ago, with
> *no* (zero) answers. How is it going?. Can I help in any way?.


It's being discussed on pyhon-dev. Dirkjan is the person to talk to if you
want to help out.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090703/1082eb48/attachment.htm>

From barry at python.org  Sat Jul  4 03:58:44 2009
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 21:58:44 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4335d2c40907031532p79a27503t9df5745165f3eae7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>
	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4E85CA.5010709@jcea.es>
	<4335d2c40907031532p79a27503t9df5745165f3eae7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <741B5871-6928-4720-A4AD-88CDE4F31C63@python.org>

On Jul 3, 2009, at 6:32 PM, David Goodger wrote:

> I followed up with a python.org front-page news item & PSF blog entry
> (both linking to that message on python-list).

I added some text to the Python 3.0.1 download page and added a link  
to Python 3.1.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090703/a7ce908c/attachment.pgp>

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Sat Jul  4 16:37:25 2009
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:37:25 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
 "release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>
	<1afaf6160907020743r147c1e1fs7651e8ab68f6cc64@mail.gmail.com>
	<e69d3ed20907020758o141cbc4fpf2c4d890433a391@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es> <20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>
	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>
	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>
	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>
	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>
	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>
	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1246718245.7085.4.camel@localhost>

Le jeudi 02 juillet 2009 ? 11:43 -0700, Brett Cannon a ?crit :
> 
> Considering Georg just discovered Fawlty Towers I think we might need
> to have required British humour training for all core committers.

I object to the British humour monopoly. I know as a fact that Georg
likes French humour a lot -- actually I'm sure he's still launghing.

Regards

Antoine.



From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sun Jul  5 11:20:58 2009
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:20:58 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <4A4DDAE9.4090600@cheimes.de>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021450360.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>	<4335d2c40907021203m3421125dsa3b5cc1bacd7b62b@mail.gmail.com>	<h2kkh6$7e2$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<4A4DDAE9.4090600@cheimes.de>
Message-ID: <h2prah$c0q$1@ger.gmane.org>

Christian Heimes schrieb:
> Georg Brandl schrieb:
>> David Goodger schrieb:
>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 14:56, R. David Murray<rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
>>>> I can see it now...the TV and movie track at PyCon 2010,
>>>> with attendance mandatory for anyone wanting to participate
>>>> in the Core sprint...
>>> We actually had a room or two for evening videos at a PyCon (both?) in
>>> Dallas. Somebody brought the boxed set of the Flying Circus show and
>>> had it running. I fondly recall processing email while chuckling...
>>>
>>> It wasn't very well attended though.
>> 
>> There is a slight chance that EuroPython 2011 might come to Germany --
>> in this case, some kind of Monty Python showing must be arranged.  As
>> you all know, we really can use the education.
> 
> Georg, I suggest that you get a head start by watching these youtube
> clips: http://www.youtube.com/user/MontyPython

Oh, myself I'm already quite familiar with the classics.  But can you
imagine people walking the streets out there not knowing anything about
dead parrots?

> Are there already plans in which city EP11 might be hosted? You know
> Spamalot is playing in Cologne, too. :)

Cologne is exactly where one group is planning to make it happen.  I
assume a discussion and planning list, whether for EP or for a smaller
German unconference, is going to be created soon.

Georg

-- 
Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less.
Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy
indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou
two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.


From barry at python.org  Sun Jul  5 16:40:15 2009
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 10:40:15 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Why r69846 is not merged to
	"release26-maint"?
In-Reply-To: <h2prah$c0q$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <4A4CC6B6.90202@jcea.es>	<4A4CCF04.4050701@jcea.es>	<20090702152227.GL65921@nexus.in-nomine.org>	<e69d3ed20907020913m18e6acf4r64aeddd5559dc193@mail.gmail.com>	<bbaeab100907021056i6685a707hb41179ae28ea04b3@mail.gmail.com>	<0BD5AB60-E040-49D0-AC10-46C5FA003C67@python.org>	<e69d3ed20907021129j5e0096cfo4cc3c583acc08b9f@mail.gmail.com>	<20F1835E-5BB0-4C86-AC65-373B3B52DDC3@python.org>	<bbaeab100907021143x62454691p41384bec9c93797b@mail.gmail.com>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021450360.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>	<4335d2c40907021203m3421125dsa3b5cc1bacd7b62b@mail.gmail.com>	<h2kkh6$7e2$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<4A4DDAE9.4090600@cheimes.de> <h2prah$c0q$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <0D5C9CE7-B0B3-4D8A-AAE4-CCBA4E36EF0E@python.org>

On Jul 5, 2009, at 5:20 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:

> Oh, myself I'm already quite familiar with the classics.  But can you
> imagine people walking the streets out there not knowing anything  
> about
> dead parrots?

I think we need a server side Mercurial plugin to reject any revision  
that doesn't quote MP in its commit message.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20090705/390323e9/attachment.pgp>

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Tue Jul  7 21:48:24 2009
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:48:24 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] r73807 - python/branches/py3k/setup.py
In-Reply-To: <20851.5821410858$1246627417@news.gmane.org>
References: <20851.5821410858$1246627417@news.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <h308pe$5de$1@ger.gmane.org>

I think this should be reverted -- the support code is not for the
bsddb module, but for building the dbm module with bsddb.

Georg

benjamin.peterson schrieb:
> Author: benjamin.peterson
> Date: Fri Jul  3 15:22:00 2009
> New Revision: 73807
> 
> Log:
> rip out bsddb support code
> 
> Modified:
>    python/branches/py3k/setup.py
> 
> Modified: python/branches/py3k/setup.py
> ==============================================================================
> --- python/branches/py3k/setup.py	(original)
> +++ python/branches/py3k/setup.py	Fri Jul  3 15:22:00 2009
> @@ -363,6 +363,7 @@
>              inc_dirs += os.getenv('C_INCLUDE_PATH', '').split(os.pathsep)
>  
>          # OSF/1 and Unixware have some stuff in /usr/ccs/lib (like -ldb)
> +        # XXX db is not needed anymore, should this be removed?
>          if platform in ['osf1', 'unixware7', 'openunix8']:
>              lib_dirs += ['/usr/ccs/lib']
>  
> @@ -625,179 +626,6 @@
>              exts.append( Extension('_md5', ['md5module.c']) )
>              exts.append( Extension('_sha1', ['sha1module.c']) )
>  
> -        # Modules that provide persistent dictionary-like semantics.  You will
> -        # probably want to arrange for at least one of them to be available on
> -        # your machine, though none are defined by default because of library
> -        # dependencies.  The Python module dbm/__init__.py provides an
> -        # implementation independent wrapper for these; dbm/dumb.py provides
> -        # similar functionality (but slower of course) implemented in Python.
> -
> -        # Sleepycat^WOracle Berkeley DB interface.
> -        #  http://www.oracle.com/database/berkeley-db/db/index.html
> -        #
> -        # This requires the Sleepycat^WOracle DB code. The supported versions
> -        # are set below.  Visit the URL above to download
> -        # a release.  Most open source OSes come with one or more
> -        # versions of BerkeleyDB already installed.
> -
> -        max_db_ver = (4, 7)
> -        min_db_ver = (3, 3)
> -        db_setup_debug = False   # verbose debug prints from this script?
> -
> -        def allow_db_ver(db_ver):
> -            """Returns a boolean if the given BerkeleyDB version is acceptable.
> -
> -            Args:
> -              db_ver: A tuple of the version to verify.
> -            """
> -            if not (min_db_ver <= db_ver <= max_db_ver):
> -                return False
> -            return True
> -
> -        def gen_db_minor_ver_nums(major):
> -            if major == 4:
> -                for x in range(max_db_ver[1]+1):
> -                    if allow_db_ver((4, x)):
> -                        yield x
> -            elif major == 3:
> -                for x in (3,):
> -                    if allow_db_ver((3, x)):
> -                        yield x
> -            else:
> -                raise ValueError("unknown major BerkeleyDB version", major)
> -
> -        # construct a list of paths to look for the header file in on
> -        # top of the normal inc_dirs.
> -        db_inc_paths = [
> -            '/usr/include/db4',
> -            '/usr/local/include/db4',
> -            '/opt/sfw/include/db4',
> -            '/usr/include/db3',
> -            '/usr/local/include/db3',
> -            '/opt/sfw/include/db3',
> -            # Fink defaults (http://fink.sourceforge.net/)
> -            '/sw/include/db4',
> -            '/sw/include/db3',
> -        ]
> -        # 4.x minor number specific paths
> -        for x in gen_db_minor_ver_nums(4):
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/usr/include/db4%d' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/usr/include/db4.%d' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.%d/include' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/usr/local/include/db4%d' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/pkg/db-4.%d/include' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/opt/db-4.%d/include' % x)
> -            # MacPorts default (http://www.macports.org/)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/opt/local/include/db4%d' % x)
> -        # 3.x minor number specific paths
> -        for x in gen_db_minor_ver_nums(3):
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/usr/include/db3%d' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.%d/include' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/usr/local/include/db3%d' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/pkg/db-3.%d/include' % x)
> -            db_inc_paths.append('/opt/db-3.%d/include' % x)
> -
> -        # Add some common subdirectories for Sleepycat DB to the list,
> -        # based on the standard include directories. This way DB3/4 gets
> -        # picked up when it is installed in a non-standard prefix and
> -        # the user has added that prefix into inc_dirs.
> -        std_variants = []
> -        for dn in inc_dirs:
> -            std_variants.append(os.path.join(dn, 'db3'))
> -            std_variants.append(os.path.join(dn, 'db4'))
> -            for x in gen_db_minor_ver_nums(4):
> -                std_variants.append(os.path.join(dn, "db4%d"%x))
> -                std_variants.append(os.path.join(dn, "db4.%d"%x))
> -            for x in gen_db_minor_ver_nums(3):
> -                std_variants.append(os.path.join(dn, "db3%d"%x))
> -                std_variants.append(os.path.join(dn, "db3.%d"%x))
> -
> -        db_inc_paths = std_variants + db_inc_paths
> -        db_inc_paths = [p for p in db_inc_paths if os.path.exists(p)]
> -
> -        db_ver_inc_map = {}
> -
> -        class db_found(Exception): pass
> -        try:
> -            # See whether there is a Sleepycat header in the standard
> -            # search path.
> -            for d in inc_dirs + db_inc_paths:
> -                f = os.path.join(d, "db.h")
> -                if db_setup_debug: print("db: looking for db.h in", f)
> -                if os.path.exists(f):
> -                    f = open(f).read()
> -                    m = re.search(r"#define\WDB_VERSION_MAJOR\W(\d+)", f)
> -                    if m:
> -                        db_major = int(m.group(1))
> -                        m = re.search(r"#define\WDB_VERSION_MINOR\W(\d+)", f)
> -                        db_minor = int(m.group(1))
> -                        db_ver = (db_major, db_minor)
> -
> -                        # Avoid 4.6 prior to 4.6.21 due to a BerkeleyDB bug
> -                        if db_ver == (4, 6):
> -                            m = re.search(r"#define\WDB_VERSION_PATCH\W(\d+)", f)
> -                            db_patch = int(m.group(1))
> -                            if db_patch < 21:
> -                                print("db.h:", db_ver, "patch", db_patch,
> -                                      "being ignored (4.6.x must be >= 4.6.21)")
> -                                continue
> -
> -                        if ( (db_ver not in db_ver_inc_map) and
> -                            allow_db_ver(db_ver) ):
> -                            # save the include directory with the db.h version
> -                            # (first occurrence only)
> -                            db_ver_inc_map[db_ver] = d
> -                            if db_setup_debug:
> -                                print("db.h: found", db_ver, "in", d)
> -                        else:
> -                            # we already found a header for this library version
> -                            if db_setup_debug: print("db.h: ignoring", d)
> -                    else:
> -                        # ignore this header, it didn't contain a version number
> -                        if db_setup_debug:
> -                            print("db.h: no version number version in", d)
> -
> -            db_found_vers = list(db_ver_inc_map.keys())
> -            db_found_vers.sort()
> -
> -            while db_found_vers:
> -                db_ver = db_found_vers.pop()
> -                db_incdir = db_ver_inc_map[db_ver]
> -
> -                # check lib directories parallel to the location of the header
> -                db_dirs_to_check = [
> -                    db_incdir.replace("include", 'lib64'),
> -                    db_incdir.replace("include", 'lib'),
> -                ]
> -                db_dirs_to_check = list(filter(os.path.isdir, db_dirs_to_check))
> -
> -                # Look for a version specific db-X.Y before an ambiguoius dbX
> -                # XXX should we -ever- look for a dbX name?  Do any
> -                # systems really not name their library by version and
> -                # symlink to more general names?
> -                for dblib in (('db-%d.%d' % db_ver),
> -                              ('db%d%d' % db_ver),
> -                              ('db%d' % db_ver[0])):
> -                    dblib_file = self.compiler.find_library_file(
> -                                    db_dirs_to_check + lib_dirs, dblib )
> -                    if dblib_file:
> -                        dblib_dir = [ os.path.abspath(os.path.dirname(dblib_file)) ]
> -                        raise db_found
> -                    else:
> -                        if db_setup_debug: print("db lib: ", dblib, "not found")
> -
> -        except db_found:
> -            if db_setup_debug:
> -                print("bsddb using BerkeleyDB lib:", db_ver, dblib)
> -                print("bsddb lib dir:", dblib_dir, " inc dir:", db_incdir)
> -            db_incs = [db_incdir]
> -            dblibs = [dblib]
> -        else:
> -            if db_setup_debug: print("db: no appropriate library found")
> -            db_incs = None
> -            dblibs = []
> -            dblib_dir = None
> -
>          # The sqlite interface
>          sqlite_setup_debug = False   # verbose debug prints from this script?
>  
> @@ -902,7 +730,7 @@
>              if dbm_args:
>                  dbm_order = dbm_args[-1].split(":")
>              else:
> -                dbm_order = "ndbm:gdbm:bdb".split(":")
> +                dbm_order = "ndbm:gdbm".split(":")
>              dbmext = None
>              for cand in dbm_order:
>                  if cand == "ndbm":
> @@ -943,18 +771,6 @@
>                                      ],
>                                  libraries = gdbm_libs)
>                              break
> -                elif cand == "bdb":
> -                    if db_incs is not None:
> -                        print("building dbm using bdb")
> -                        dbmext = Extension('_dbm', ['_dbmmodule.c'],
> -                                           library_dirs=dblib_dir,
> -                                           runtime_library_dirs=dblib_dir,
> -                                           include_dirs=db_incs,
> -                                           define_macros=[
> -                                               ('HAVE_BERKDB_H', None),
> -                                               ('DB_DBM_HSEARCH', None),
> -                                               ],
> -                                           libraries=dblibs)
>                          break
>              if dbmext is not None:
>                  exts.append(dbmext)



From benjamin at python.org  Wed Jul  8 04:10:39 2009
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 21:10:39 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] r73807 - python/branches/py3k/setup.py
In-Reply-To: <h308pe$5de$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <20851.5821410858$1246627417@news.gmane.org>
	<h308pe$5de$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <1afaf6160907071910p5b39be43sbbcf15dcb4685ae5@mail.gmail.com>

2009/7/7 Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net>:
> I think this should be reverted -- the support code is not for the
> bsddb module, but for building the dbm module with bsddb.

Would you mind doing the honors? I'm on holiday.:)



-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

From jcea at jcea.es  Wed Jul  8 14:49:45 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:49:45 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Berkeley DB (Was: Re: r73807 -
	python/branches/py3k/setup.py)
In-Reply-To: <h308pe$5de$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <20851.5821410858$1246627417@news.gmane.org>
	<h308pe$5de$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <4A5495E9.8050306@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Georg Brandl wrote:
> I think this should be reverted -- the support code is not for the
> bsddb module, but for building the dbm module with bsddb.

I pretend to ask for re-inclusion of BerkeleyDB in Python 3.x branch in
the future (maybe around christmas), now that it is under control, very
solid, and a needed storage option in the standard lib.

It has a pretty number of downloads in PYPI, so people is interested in
it, and having a "good" storage option in the standard lib is mandatory
(ACID, distributed transactions, replication...).

But I don't want to open-fire just now... O:-).

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSlSV5Zlgi5GaxT1NAQILoAQAhLQ/yChYYDMKCcH9M+hPXCqHPX+jRP77
tpzA6S2bfTuLOaiKCdyQmkW69tTGNNM8L8veSF18ngJF1nWJQnFQTSO8O23653GI
mEA4eSi1S+a6BMQV0w8/mJSUPGPQk/EW6e+FVn29ZDK7kR9SAR8skP3H15BvOn2M
0QgIsP/hKxw=
=cAZ3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From kbk at shore.net  Thu Jul  9 23:27:19 2009
From: kbk at shore.net (Kurt B. Kaiser)
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:27:19 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Mysterious uidNNN committers
In-Reply-To: <20090703191206.GB8240@andrew-kuchlings-macbook.local>
References: <20090703191206.GB8240@andrew-kuchlings-macbook.local>
Message-ID: <1247174839.32661.1324336135@webmail.messagingengine.com>


On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:12:06 -0400, "A.M. Kuchling" <amk at amk.ca> said:
> I've been analyzing how much of the Python code is covered
> by the contributor agreements in the PSF's possession.
> 
> The logs show four mysterious IDs of the form uidNNNN; I'd like to
> figure out who two of those IDs were.  (Two of the IDs are gone in
> 3.1-trunk, so I don't care about them.)
> 
[...]

> 
> uid56795's commit is to Lib/idlelib/Debugger.py.  Most of the commits
> to idlelib around this time are by Kurt Kaiser, but there are a few by
> Chui Tey.  (In either case, both of them have signed agreements, so
> the code is likely covered.)
> 
> r27482 | uid56795 | 2002-07-05 18:05:24 -0400 (Fri, 05 Jul 2002) | 5
> lines
> 
> Combine OldStackViewer.py with Debugger.py, removing dead code.
> M Debugger.py       : Incorporate StackViewer, NamespaceViewer classes
> M StackViewer.py    : remove import OldStackViewer
> U OldStackViewer.py : remove file
> --------------------------------------------------


That's clearly my code.  I think what happened was the SF system was
broken for a short time and didn't resolve the uid to kbk.

So one more down.

-- 
KBK


From kbk at shore.net  Thu Jul  9 23:36:14 2009
From: kbk at shore.net (Kurt B. Kaiser)
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:36:14 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Board] Mysterious uidNNN committers
In-Reply-To: <4A4E7E4C.9090605@v.loewis.de>
References: <20090703191206.GB8240@andrew-kuchlings-macbook.local>
	<1f7befae0907031419s73f2a26fgaabdfa0de37dc1ea@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4E7E4C.9090605@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <1247175374.1873.1324337249@webmail.messagingengine.com>


On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:55:24 +0200, ""Martin v. L?wis""
<martin at v.loewis.de> said:
> >> r21474 | uid26747 | 2001-07-04 18:11:22 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 11 lines
> >>
> >> Added a non-recursive implementation of conjoin(), and a Knight's Tour
> >> solver. ...
> > 
> > 100% sure that was indeed me.  No idea how it showed up as "uid26747",
> > though -- that rings no bells at all.
> 
> Try logging into shell.sf.net. You'll need to do
> 
>  ssh tim_one,python at shell.sf.net create
> 
> these days first. Then run id(1); my guess that it gives
> you this number.

Good one, Martin.  I confirmed that I'm one of the mysterious ones.

-bash-3.2$ id
uid=56795(kbk) gid=10579(idlefork) groups=10579(idlefork)
-bash-3.2$ 

-- 
KBK


From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Fri Jul 10 23:29:26 2009
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:29:26 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [python-committers] Berkeley DB (Was: Re: r73807 -
	python/branches/py3k/setup.py)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907101719380.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>

Jesus Cea wrote:
>Georg Brandl wrote:
>> I think this should be reverted -- the support code is not for the
>> bsddb module, but for building the dbm module with bsddb.
>
>I pretend to ask for re-inclusion of BerkeleyDB in Python 3.x branch in
>the future (maybe around christmas), now that it is under control, very
>solid, and a needed storage option in the standard lib.

It seems to me (though I admit I haven't been watching closely recently)
that the buildbots still report bsddb errors on trunk on a fairly regular
basis. If I'm not imagining things is there any chance you could take
a look at that?

--David

From jcea at jcea.es  Sat Jul 11 02:41:32 2009
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 02:41:32 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Berkeley DB (Was: Re: r73807
	-	python/branches/py3k/setup.py)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907101719380.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907101719380.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <4A57DFBC.7090900@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

R. David Murray wrote:
> It seems to me (though I admit I haven't been watching closely recently)
> that the buildbots still report bsddb errors on trunk on a fairly regular
> basis. If I'm not imagining things is there any chance you could take
> a look at that?

I am not aware of that. I only check buildbots after doing commits. If
somebody has a buildbot reference, please share. I promise to work to
solve it.

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBSlfftplgi5GaxT1NAQJvvQP+PWhnPveJ7HK48DvortGaZAbQUS+8AoGX
MDfZCNuOjxm8qFyu25tEaOEwrasAh8M3yS7pNj1RHsXBUaUDZc9AUy3VMJ3H22px
AzgrnKGjx+axzTbObSGslpsEw8lbdGWWZt5gZnEvg+taIQU6k6wndPNoHrVRXhxa
Uo0NgCK4oB0=
=sgcn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From ocean-city at m2.ccsnet.ne.jp  Sat Jul 11 04:12:11 2009
From: ocean-city at m2.ccsnet.ne.jp (Hirokazu Yamamoto)
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:12:11 +0900
Subject: [python-committers] Berkeley DB (Was: Re:
	r73807	-	python/branches/py3k/setup.py)
In-Reply-To: <4A57DFBC.7090900@jcea.es>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907101719380.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
	<4A57DFBC.7090900@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <4A57F4FB.8060407@m2.ccsnet.ne.jp>


Jesus Cea wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> R. David Murray wrote:
>> It seems to me (though I admit I haven't been watching closely recently)
>> that the buildbots still report bsddb errors on trunk on a fairly regular
>> basis. If I'm not imagining things is there any chance you could take
>> a look at that?
> 
> I am not aware of that. I only check buildbots after doing commits. If
> somebody has a buildbot reference, please share. I promise to work to
> solve it.

I often see timeout problem on windows buildbot.
Please see http://bugs.python.org/issue3892


From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Sat Jul 11 04:51:11 2009
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:51:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [python-committers] Berkeley DB (Was: Re: r73807	-
 python/branches/py3k/setup.py)
In-Reply-To: <4A57DFBC.7090900@jcea.es>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907101719380.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>
	<4A57DFBC.7090900@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907102249130.6306@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 at 02:41, Jesus Cea wrote:
> R. David Murray wrote:
>> It seems to me (though I admit I haven't been watching closely recently)
>> that the buildbots still report bsddb errors on trunk on a fairly regular
>> basis. If I'm not imagining things is there any chance you could take
>> a look at that?
>
> I am not aware of that. I only check buildbots after doing commits. If
> somebody has a buildbot reference, please share. I promise to work to
> solve it.

Well, the most recent one is here:

     http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/trunk.stable/amd64%20gentoo%20trunk/builds/284/step-test/0

It may not be an error per se, but there is a traceback in the log that
the buildbot reports.

--David

From benjamin at python.org  Mon Jul 13 01:57:21 2009
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 18:57:21 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] encoding of Misc/NEWS and Misc/ACKS
Message-ID: <1afaf6160907121657g263bccdbj23e6eddd99304d4e@mail.gmail.com>

Since we are living in 2009 now, I've changed the encodings of
Misc/ACKS and Misc/NEWS to UTF-8 from latin-1.

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin