From barry at python.org  Tue Oct  1 02:17:51 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 20:17:51 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] 2.6.9rc1
Message-ID: <20130930201751.12991e4e@anarchist>

Not that anybody would be crazy enough to do so, but please do not commit
anything to the 2.6 branch.  I am spinning 2.6.9rc1 now.

Cheers,
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20130930/4460e023/attachment.sig>

From larry at hastings.org  Sat Oct 19 21:00:39 2013
From: larry at hastings.org (Larry Hastings)
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:00:39 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] I *might* push Python 3.4.0 alpha 4 back a week
Message-ID: <5262D6D7.8050908@hastings.org>


A lot has landed in trunk in the last day or two: Tulip, Argument 
Clinic, and statistics just landed too.  The buildbots are upset at us 
humans--there's a lot of red.  See for yourself:

    http://buildbot.python.org/all/waterfall?category=3.x.stable

I'd like to tag Alpha 4 late tonight, but if the buildbots are still 
mostly-red it's a bad idea.  If you can help make the buildbots happy, 
and have some time in the next eight or ten hours, please hop in to 
#python-dev and ask what you can do to help.

SOS -- Save Our Schedule,


//arry/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131019/c23fa95f/attachment.html>

From victor.stinner at gmail.com  Sat Oct 19 23:59:29 2013
From: victor.stinner at gmail.com (Victor Stinner)
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 23:59:29 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] I *might* push Python 3.4.0 alpha 4 back a
	week
In-Reply-To: <5262D6D7.8050908@hastings.org>
References: <5262D6D7.8050908@hastings.org>
Message-ID: <CAMpsgwZReZf_=eCmTVnhFJGutKGBP1mbz0tEnLitiwq-_S=2Gg@mail.gmail.com>

2013/10/19 Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org>:
> A lot has landed in trunk in the last day or two: Tulip, Argument Clinic,
> and statistics just landed too.

Wow, Python 3.4 looks great! I was waiting for statistics.

Don't forget to update the What's New in Python 3.4 document.

Victor

From larry at hastings.org  Mon Oct 21 00:52:57 2013
From: larry at hastings.org (Larry Hastings)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 15:52:57 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Python 3.4.0a4: Coming In For A Bumpy Landing
Message-ID: <52645EC9.20906@hastings.org>



3.4.0a4 is tagged and I'm in the process of releasing it.  But it's 
going to be, let's say, more "alpha-quality" than the previous alphas.

Known problems:

  * There's a reference count leak in the compiler.
  * asyncio test suite sometimes times out, which takes... an hour.
  * asyncio test suit fails on a couple of platforms.


I don't think any of these are bad enough to slip the schedule. However, 
if you disagree, pipe up, feel free to try and change my mind, it's not 
too late.


//arry/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131020/463d76cf/attachment.html>

From benjamin at python.org  Mon Oct 21 00:57:10 2013
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 18:57:10 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] [Python-Dev] Python 3.4.0a4: Coming In For
	A Bumpy Landing
In-Reply-To: <52645EC9.20906@hastings.org>
References: <52645EC9.20906@hastings.org>
Message-ID: <CAPZV6o-sscZoL_hh=aNk1m8F+cn7mDe_e3z05XM8De7z3rOSnw@mail.gmail.com>

2013/10/20 Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org>:
>
>
> 3.4.0a4 is tagged and I'm in the process of releasing it.  But it's going to
> be, let's say, more "alpha-quality" than the previous alphas.
>
> Known problems:
>
> There's a reference count leak in the compiler.

This is fixed, so you could just move the tag up a bit.


-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

From nad at acm.org  Mon Oct 21 01:10:14 2013
From: nad at acm.org (Ned Deily)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 16:10:14 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] [Python-Dev] Python 3.4.0a4: Coming In For
	A Bumpy Landing
In-Reply-To: <CAPZV6o-sscZoL_hh=aNk1m8F+cn7mDe_e3z05XM8De7z3rOSnw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52645EC9.20906@hastings.org>
 <CAPZV6o-sscZoL_hh=aNk1m8F+cn7mDe_e3z05XM8De7z3rOSnw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D0D0E759-4D29-4AFE-8D8C-64752F253493@acm.org>


On Oct 20, 2013, at 15:57 , Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org> wrote:

> 2013/10/20 Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org>:
>> 
>> 
>> 3.4.0a4 is tagged and I'm in the process of releasing it.  But it's going to
>> be, let's say, more "alpha-quality" than the previous alphas.
>> 
>> Known problems:
>> 
>> There's a reference count leak in the compiler.
> 
> This is fixed, so you could just move the tag up a bit.


Unfortunately, the Windows and OS X installers have already been manufactured so we would either have to redo them or document that there is a discrepancy between the source and binary releases.  Probably not a big deal in any case for an alpha release.

--
  Ned Deily
  nad at acm.org -- []



From benjamin at python.org  Mon Oct 21 01:15:40 2013
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 19:15:40 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] [Python-Dev] Python 3.4.0a4: Coming In For
 A Bumpy Landing
In-Reply-To: <D0D0E759-4D29-4AFE-8D8C-64752F253493@acm.org>
References: <52645EC9.20906@hastings.org>
 <CAPZV6o-sscZoL_hh=aNk1m8F+cn7mDe_e3z05XM8De7z3rOSnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <D0D0E759-4D29-4AFE-8D8C-64752F253493@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CAPZV6o858yBGAwxetQKbt7nNvv+cDte_Jrzwfs7PVMK=HaeH8w@mail.gmail.com>

2013/10/20 Ned Deily <nad at acm.org>:
>
> On Oct 20, 2013, at 15:57 , Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org> wrote:
>
>> 2013/10/20 Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org>:
>>>
>>>
>>> 3.4.0a4 is tagged and I'm in the process of releasing it.  But it's going to
>>> be, let's say, more "alpha-quality" than the previous alphas.
>>>
>>> Known problems:
>>>
>>> There's a reference count leak in the compiler.
>>
>> This is fixed, so you could just move the tag up a bit.
>
>
> Unfortunately, the Windows and OS X installers have already been manufactured so we would either have to redo them or document that there is a discrepancy between the source and binary releases.  Probably not a big deal in any case for an alpha release.

Ah, I didn't realize the release process had gotten that far. Carry on.


-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

From larry at hastings.org  Mon Oct 21 02:24:57 2013
From: larry at hastings.org (Larry Hastings)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 17:24:57 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] [RELEASED] Python 3.4.0a4
Message-ID: <52647459.5000205@hastings.org>


On behalf of the Python development team, I'm very pleased to announce
the fourth and final alpha release of Python 3.4.

This is a preview release, and its use is not recommended for
production settings.

Python 3.4 includes a range of improvements of the 3.x series, including
hundreds of small improvements and bug fixes.  Major new features and
changes in the 3.4 release series so far include:

* PEP 435, a standardized "enum" module
* PEP 436, a build enhancement that will help generate introspection
            information for builtins
* PEP 442, improved semantics for object finalization
* PEP 443, adding single-dispatch generic functions to the standard library
* PEP 445, a new C API for implementing custom memory allocators
* PEP 446, changing file descriptors to not be inherited by default
            in subprocesses
* PEP 450, the new "statistics" module
* PEP 3156, the new "asyncio" module, a new framework for asynchronous I/O

To download Python 3.4.0a4 visit:

     http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.4.0/


Python 3.4.0a4 has several known issues:

* The Python compiler has a small memory leak.
* The "asyncio" module test suite fails on some platforms.
* I/O conducted by the "asyncio" module may, rarely,
   erroneously time out.  The timeout takes one hour.

Please consider trying Python 3.4.0a4 with your code and reporting any
new issues you notice to:

      http://bugs.python.org/


Enjoy!

--
Larry Hastings, Release Manager
larry at hastings.org
(on behalf of the entire python-dev team and 3.4's contributors)

From barry at python.org  Mon Oct 21 13:46:12 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 07:46:12 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.9 final final due out 28 October 2013
Message-ID: <20131021074612.51e95ec1@anarchist>

This is a reminder that Python 2.6.9 final - and by that I mean *really* final
as it will be the last supported version of Python 2.6 - is scheduled for
release one week from today, on October 28, 2013.

All known showstopper security bugs have been applied to the branch.  If you
know of anything that should go into Python 2.6 but has not yet, please
contact me asap.  Please test rc1 on your platforms and code, and let me know
if you have any problems.

Barring any showstoppers, I will likely cut the release AM my local time.

Cheers,
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131021/fba6e2ad/attachment.sig>

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Thu Oct 24 12:39:50 2013
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 20:39:50 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Upgrade Donald Stufft to full committer status
Message-ID: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>

With PEP 453 accepted, could Donald please be upgraded to full
committer access for ensurepip maintenance (the initial PEP 453
commits will still go through review on the tracker). (His SSH key is
already on file for PEP updates, so I believe the only actual change
needed is to adjust his status on the issue tracker)

Cheers,
Nick.

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

From hs at ox.cx  Thu Oct 24 13:03:16 2013
From: hs at ox.cx (Hynek Schlawack)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:03:16 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Upgrade Donald Stufft to full committer
	status
In-Reply-To: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58D5AE65-89BA-4E25-BD6B-09CFA49A09C8@ox.cx>


Am 24.10.2013 um 12:39 schrieb Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com>:

> With PEP 453 accepted, could Donald please be upgraded to full
> committer access for ensurepip maintenance (the initial PEP 453
> commits will still go through review on the tracker). (His SSH key is
> already on file for PEP updates, so I believe the only actual change
> needed is to adjust his status on the issue tracker)

Please do. :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 235 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131024/dbabc34d/attachment.sig>

From eliben at gmail.com  Thu Oct 24 14:43:21 2013
From: eliben at gmail.com (Eli Bendersky)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 05:43:21 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Upgrade Donald Stufft to full committer
	status
In-Reply-To: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAF-Rda8P_-GaE_nzGa8y38DdNy44CuZjimYxF5Qr_b8mdFQGfQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

> With PEP 453 accepted, could Donald please be upgraded to full
> committer access for ensurepip maintenance (the initial PEP 453
> commits will still go through review on the tracker). (His SSH key is
> already on file for PEP updates, so I believe the only actual change
> needed is to adjust his status on the issue tracker)
>

Seeing Donald's involvement in the Python infrastructure, I think it's a
no-brainer +1

Eli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131024/b118f48b/attachment.html>

From brett at python.org  Thu Oct 24 15:21:20 2013
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:21:20 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Upgrade Donald Stufft to full committer
	status
In-Reply-To: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAP1=2W4GuqWvNqYYV0koUAfzt9LzwKhDXe9BrWPF3jjUmceEfw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:39 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

> With PEP 453 accepted, could Donald please be upgraded to full
> committer access for ensurepip maintenance (the initial PEP 453
> commits will still go through review on the tracker). (His SSH key is
> already on file for PEP updates, so I believe the only actual change
> needed is to adjust his status on the issue tracker)
>

I just approved his subscription to python-committers, so that leaves
Donald replying to this email with his tracker ID so one of us can tweak
his settings.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131024/39aa69ba/attachment.html>

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Thu Oct 24 16:59:04 2013
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:59:04 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Your buildbots are out of memory
In-Reply-To: <CAP1=2W4bKw1aTbMFbgzd8QWtn9cmtX-Sz0NrF5xx3XcC2M86Vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP1=2W4bKw1aTbMFbgzd8QWtn9cmtX-Sz0NrF5xx3XcC2M86Vw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20131024145904.DE61B250B48@webabinitio.net>

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:12:07 -0400, Brett Cannon <brett at yvrsfo.ca> wrote:
> FYI if you didn't know

You mean disk space?  I don't get notified automatically when /tmp fills
up with test detritus.  I suppose I should set something up.

However, it looks like someone has added some tests that use more tmp space,
since the amount of /tmp that exist has been fine up until this point,
and the runs on 2.7 and 3.3 are still working.

I can increase /tmp, but I wonder if there is a new test that should
be protected with the largefile resource.  Perhaps not,
/tmp is currently 16MB on those bots, and I'm not sure what we
consider 'large' for test files.

--David

From antoine at python.org  Thu Oct 24 17:08:11 2013
From: antoine at python.org (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 17:08:11 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Your buildbots are out of memory
In-Reply-To: <20131024145904.DE61B250B48@webabinitio.net>
References: <CAP1=2W4bKw1aTbMFbgzd8QWtn9cmtX-Sz0NrF5xx3XcC2M86Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20131024145904.DE61B250B48@webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <c5899c3f1690eee86421f921da4f2bf1@ssl.pitrou.net>

On 2013-10-24 16:59, R. David Murray wrote:
> 
> However, it looks like someone has added some tests that use more tmp 
> space,
> since the amount of /tmp that exist has been fine up until this point,
> and the runs on 2.7 and 3.3 are still working.
> 
> I can increase /tmp, but I wonder if there is a new test that should
> be protected with the largefile resource.  Perhaps not,
> /tmp is currently 16MB on those bots, and I'm not sure what we
> consider 'large' for test files.

For test files, I would consider "large" to start around 100MB or more 
:-)
16MB is less than the size of a Python process executing regrtest...
It's incredibly small.

Regards

Antoine.


From donald at stufft.io  Thu Oct 24 17:42:18 2013
From: donald at stufft.io (Donald Stufft)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:42:18 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Upgrade Donald Stufft to full committer
	status
In-Reply-To: <CAP1=2W4GuqWvNqYYV0koUAfzt9LzwKhDXe9BrWPF3jjUmceEfw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP1=2W4GuqWvNqYYV0koUAfzt9LzwKhDXe9BrWPF3jjUmceEfw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <557B88FC-DAA6-4582-9369-08B3CD07DB2A@stufft.io>

dstufft

On Oct 24, 2013, at 9:21 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:39 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> With PEP 453 accepted, could Donald please be upgraded to full
> committer access for ensurepip maintenance (the initial PEP 453
> commits will still go through review on the tracker). (His SSH key is
> already on file for PEP updates, so I believe the only actual change
> needed is to adjust his status on the issue tracker)
> 
> I just approved his subscription to python-committers, so that leaves Donald replying to this email with his tracker ID so one of us can tweak his settings. 
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers


-----------------
Donald Stufft
PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131024/c9c43ee3/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131024/c9c43ee3/attachment-0001.sig>

From brett at python.org  Thu Oct 24 18:38:23 2013
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 12:38:23 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Upgrade Donald Stufft to full committer
	status
In-Reply-To: <557B88FC-DAA6-4582-9369-08B3CD07DB2A@stufft.io>
References: <CADiSq7ePP01_Epwd6=h7LmtWgETahR1YRU-0S6S7W=E+ncd6GQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP1=2W4GuqWvNqYYV0koUAfzt9LzwKhDXe9BrWPF3jjUmceEfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <557B88FC-DAA6-4582-9369-08B3CD07DB2A@stufft.io>
Message-ID: <CAP1=2W4qaPRUexO7OW5H3n186sbbHgHqixZmzrjBzmgd==cEBQ@mail.gmail.com>

Changes made to bugs.python.org


On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io> wrote:

> dstufft
>
> On Oct 24, 2013, at 9:21 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:39 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> With PEP 453 accepted, could Donald please be upgraded to full
>> committer access for ensurepip maintenance (the initial PEP 453
>> commits will still go through review on the tracker). (His SSH key is
>> already on file for PEP updates, so I believe the only actual change
>> needed is to adjust his status on the issue tracker)
>>
>
> I just approved his subscription to python-committers, so that leaves
> Donald replying to this email with his tracker ID so one of us can tweak
> his settings.
>  _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>
>
>
> -----------------
> Donald Stufft
> PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372
> DCFA
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131024/a88be510/attachment.html>

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Thu Oct 24 19:53:31 2013
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:53:31 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Your buildbots are out of memory
In-Reply-To: <c5899c3f1690eee86421f921da4f2bf1@ssl.pitrou.net>
References: <CAP1=2W4bKw1aTbMFbgzd8QWtn9cmtX-Sz0NrF5xx3XcC2M86Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20131024145904.DE61B250B48@webabinitio.net>
 <c5899c3f1690eee86421f921da4f2bf1@ssl.pitrou.net>
Message-ID: <20131024175332.6400C250BB3@webabinitio.net>

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 17:08:11 +0200, Antoine Pitrou <antoine at python.org> wrote:
> On 2013-10-24 16:59, R. David Murray wrote:
> > 
> > However, it looks like someone has added some tests that use more tmp 
> > space,
> > since the amount of /tmp that exist has been fine up until this point,
> > and the runs on 2.7 and 3.3 are still working.
> > 
> > I can increase /tmp, but I wonder if there is a new test that should
> > be protected with the largefile resource.  Perhaps not,
> > /tmp is currently 16MB on those bots, and I'm not sure what we
> > consider 'large' for test files.
> 
> For test files, I would consider "large" to start around 100MB or more 
> :-)
> 16MB is less than the size of a Python process executing regrtest...
> It's incredibly small.

It's the default value for the /tmp in-memory filesystem on
linux vserver, and like I said it has been enough up to this point.
(Yes it fills up sometimes, but that's because of test failures
in the bsddb tests that don't clean up properly.)

Anyway, based on Antoine's opinion, I've increased the size to 120MB.

--David

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sun Oct 27 13:57:26 2013
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 13:57:26 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] 3.3.3rc1 tagged
Message-ID: <l4j2h8$rna$1@ger.gmane.org>

Hi,

I've tagged 3.3.3rc1 today; final is scheduled for Nov 8.  Please notify
me of any 3.3 regressions you find; I will then port them to the repo
from which the final is cut.

General bugfixing can continue on the 3.3 branch in the main repo and will
not be relevant for 3.3.

cheers,
Georg


From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sun Oct 27 13:59:39 2013
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 13:59:39 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] 3.3.3rc1 tagged
In-Reply-To: <l4j2h8$rna$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <l4j2h8$rna$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <l4j2lc$rna$2@ger.gmane.org>

Am 27.10.2013 13:57, schrieb Georg Brandl:
> Hi,
> 
> I've tagged 3.3.3rc1 today; final is scheduled for Nov 8.  Please notify
> me of any 3.3 regressions you find; I will then port them to the repo
> from which the final is cut.
> 
> General bugfixing can continue on the 3.3 branch in the main repo and will
> not be relevant for 3.3.
                      ^^^
should be 3.3.3, of course.

Georg



From georg at python.org  Sun Oct 27 21:47:05 2013
From: georg at python.org (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 21:47:05 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [RELEASED] Python 3.3.3 release candidate 1
Message-ID: <526D7BC9.5060609@python.org>

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

On behalf of the Python development team, I'm quite happy to announce the
Python 3.3.3 release candidate 1.

Python 3.3.3 includes several security fixes and over 150 bug fixes compared to
the Python 3.3.2 release.

This release fully supports OS X 10.9 Mavericks.  In particular, this release
fixes an issue that could cause previous versions of Python to crash when typing
in interactive mode on OS X 10.9.

Python 3.3.3 also contains a new batteries-included feature for OS X users of
IDLE and other Tkinter-based programs.  The python.org Mac OS X 64-bit/32-bit
x86-64/i386 Installer for OS X 10.6+ now includes its own builtin version of
Tcl/Tk 8.5.  It is no longer necessary to install a third-party version of
Tcl/Tk 8.5 to workaround the problematic system versions.  See
http://www.python.org/download/mac/tcltk/ for more information.

Python 3.3 includes a range of improvements of the 3.x series, as well as easier
porting between 2.x and 3.x.  In total, almost 500 API items are new or improved
in Python 3.3.  For a more extensive list of changes in the 3.3 series, see

    http://docs.python.org/3.3/whatsnew/3.3.html

and for the detailed changelog of 3.3.3, see

    http://docs.python.org/3.3/whatsnew/changelog.html

To download Python 3.3.3 rc1 visit:

    http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.3.3/

This is a preview release, please report any bugs to

     http://bugs.python.org/

The final version is scheduled to be released in two weeks' time, on or about
the 10th of November.

Enjoy!

- --
Georg Brandl, Release Manager
georg at python.org
(on behalf of the entire python-dev team and 3.3's contributors)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlJte8kACgkQN9GcIYhpnLDx8wCgqtabbC8DaoW+Vy03AYGWyLhw
sWcAoIK5jQeXDAxHayG+VWH/rRF1+qHC
=yOed
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From barry at python.org  Tue Oct 29 14:55:44 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 09:55:44 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] 2.6.9 final
Message-ID: <20131029095544.45b746e2@anarchist>

I wasn't able to release 2.6.9 last night due to unrelated issues.  I'm going
to be spinning the release today.

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131029/9a260733/attachment.sig>

From barry at python.org  Wed Oct 30 15:13:01 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 10:13:01 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
Message-ID: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>

Now that 2.6.9 is out, I wonder if there's anything we can or should do to the
Mercurial repository to explicitly prevent commits to the 2.6 branch?  We have
we done to older branches?

Also, can anybody think of anything in the devguide that needs to be updated?

Cheers,
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131030/9a338ab2/attachment.sig>

From benjamin at python.org  Wed Oct 30 15:18:01 2013
From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 10:18:01 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>
Message-ID: <CAPZV6o9sJpYdzE+L_EvqzHMt5JGpRUXQwAzorL=knjTOGtDx2Q@mail.gmail.com>

2013/10/30 Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org>:
> Now that 2.6.9 is out, I wonder if there's anything we can or should do to the
> Mercurial repository to explicitly prevent commits to the 2.6 branch?  We have
> we done to older branches?

I've now disabled pushing to the 2.6 branch.



-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

From barry at python.org  Wed Oct 30 15:20:58 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 10:20:58 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <CAPZV6o9sJpYdzE+L_EvqzHMt5JGpRUXQwAzorL=knjTOGtDx2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>
 <CAPZV6o9sJpYdzE+L_EvqzHMt5JGpRUXQwAzorL=knjTOGtDx2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20131030102058.1d2f427b@anarchist>

On Oct 30, 2013, at 10:18 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:

>I've now disabled pushing to the 2.6 branch.

Thanks!
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131030/62cc485a/attachment.sig>

From martin at v.loewis.de  Wed Oct 30 15:24:56 2013
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 15:24:56 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>
Message-ID: <527116B8.2040709@v.loewis.de>

Am 30.10.13 15:13, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> Now that 2.6.9 is out, I wonder if there's anything we can or
> should do to the Mercurial repository to explicitly prevent commits
> to the 2.6 branch?  We have we done to older branches?

I think closing the branch is just right; it's done through "hg commit
--close-branch".

> We have we done to older branches?

hg branches -c will tell:

default                    86195:63a1ee94b3ed
2.7                        86192:0820e8394d96
3.3                        86193:249ba942a6d4 (inaktiv)
2.6                        85914:6d7ae764b4f2 (inaktiv)
3.2                        85752:ef90c40fe6cf (inaktiv)
3.1                        85751:713d71048ab9 (inaktiv)
2.5                        73244:b48e1b48e670 (geschlossen)
3.0                        68249:4cd9f5e89061 (geschlossen)
legacy-trunk               68241:b77918288f7d (geschlossen)
2.4                        68239:ceec209b26d4 (geschlossen)
2.3                        68237:364638d6434d (geschlossen)
2.2                        68235:61b0263d6881 (geschlossen)
2.1                        68233:e849d484029f (geschlossen)
2.0                        68231:5fd74354d73b (geschlossen)

In addition, I *think* we have a hook on the master that prevents
further pushes to the branch.

> Also, can anybody think of anything in the devguide that needs to
> be updated?

Not the devguide. If anywhere, in PEP 101.

Regards,
Martin


From barry at python.org  Wed Oct 30 16:34:49 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:34:49 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <527116B8.2040709@v.loewis.de>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist> <527116B8.2040709@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <20131030113449.4d5f25ee@anarchist>

On Oct 30, 2013, at 03:24 PM, Martin v. L?wis wrote:

>I think closing the branch is just right; it's done through "hg commit
>--close-branch".

>In addition, I *think* we have a hook on the master that prevents
>further pushes to the branch.

Looks like Benjamin updated the hook but didn't close the branch.  I think
we've got that all sorted out now though.

>Not the devguide. If anywhere, in PEP 101.

I'll take a swing through that when I get some free time.

Cheers,
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131030/a9b3646b/attachment.sig>

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Wed Oct 30 16:28:54 2013
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 01:28:54 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <527116B8.2040709@v.loewis.de>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist> <527116B8.2040709@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <CADiSq7exg=A8ip8GZNsS65e4daTo3QQ8MnPrYweRyRjTZcg6rA@mail.gmail.com>

On 31 Oct 2013 00:31, Martin v. L?wis <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
>
> Am 30.10.13 15:13, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> > Now that 2.6.9 is out, I wonder if there's anything we can or
> > should do to the Mercurial repository to explicitly prevent commits
> > to the 2.6 branch?  We have we done to older branches?
>
> I think closing the branch is just right; it's done through "hg commit
> --close-branch".
>
> > We have we done to older branches?
>
> hg branches -c will tell:
>
> default                    86195:63a1ee94b3ed
> 2.7                        86192:0820e8394d96
> 3.3                        86193:249ba942a6d4 (inaktiv)
> 2.6                        85914:6d7ae764b4f2 (inaktiv)
> 3.2                        85752:ef90c40fe6cf (inaktiv)
> 3.1                        85751:713d71048ab9 (inaktiv)
> 2.5                        73244:b48e1b48e670 (geschlossen)
> 3.0                        68249:4cd9f5e89061 (geschlossen)
> legacy-trunk               68241:b77918288f7d (geschlossen)
> 2.4                        68239:ceec209b26d4 (geschlossen)
> 2.3                        68237:364638d6434d (geschlossen)
> 2.2                        68235:61b0263d6881 (geschlossen)
> 2.1                        68233:e849d484029f (geschlossen)
> 2.0                        68231:5fd74354d73b (geschlossen)
>
> In addition, I *think* we have a hook on the master that prevents
> further pushes to the branch.
>
> > Also, can anybody think of anything in the devguide that needs to
> > be updated?
>
> Not the devguide. If anywhere, in PEP 101.

There's a trick to get the PEP 0 generator to move the release PEP to the
historical section, too. I'd have to look at the source code to remember
what it is, though.

Cheers,
Nick.

>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131031/5b1b37c6/attachment-0001.html>

From jcea at jcea.es  Wed Oct 30 16:34:32 2013
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 16:34:32 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <CAPZV6o9sJpYdzE+L_EvqzHMt5JGpRUXQwAzorL=knjTOGtDx2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>
 <CAPZV6o9sJpYdzE+L_EvqzHMt5JGpRUXQwAzorL=knjTOGtDx2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <52712708.2030302@jcea.es>

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

On 30/10/13 15:18, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2013/10/30 Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org>:
>> Now that 2.6.9 is out, I wonder if there's anything we can or 
>> should do to the Mercurial repository to explicitly prevent 
>> commits to the 2.6 branch?  We have we done to older branches?
> 
> I've now disabled pushing to the 2.6 branch.

Could I suggest to mark the branch as "closed" in Mercurial?. I still
see it in "hg heads".

- -- 
Jes?s Cea Avi?n                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
Twitter: @jcea                        _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
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 v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQCVAwUBUnEnCJlgi5GaxT1NAQKQagP+PCtYPHZ6FmcRyva2oDT4spP4UcuNheEw
faqrVe+jDdDEXx9hPiU36VLfQpSZKFHUQKAw7jBBJCYi5TSyxYq2oEGhdTwjg6JL
bsQ1mbE2H/7a+uB30+fUiZmydcqD8fpeSmWwFMjDzYO6z55kmCXpFxUHnEBa3hCM
LhOR20hgFVE=
=wqbn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From barry at python.org  Wed Oct 30 16:54:25 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:54:25 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <CADiSq7exg=A8ip8GZNsS65e4daTo3QQ8MnPrYweRyRjTZcg6rA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist> <527116B8.2040709@v.loewis.de>
 <CADiSq7exg=A8ip8GZNsS65e4daTo3QQ8MnPrYweRyRjTZcg6rA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20131030115425.06b3528f@anarchist>

On Oct 31, 2013, at 01:28 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:

>There's a trick to get the PEP 0 generator to move the release PEP to the
>historical section, too. I'd have to look at the source code to remember
>what it is, though.

        elif pep.type_ == 'Informational':
            # Hack until the conflict between the use of "Final"
            # for both API definition PEPs and other (actually
            # obsolete) PEPs is addressed
            if (pep.status == "Active" or
                "Release Schedule" not in pep.title):
                info.append(pep)
            else:
                historical.append(pep)

So PEP 361 (the 2.6/3.0 release schedule PEP) actually does end up in the
Historical bin.  The PEP itself probably should have remained Active until
yesterday.

Do we want an explicit state for Status: Final -> Historical?

(TBH, I don't care enough to do any work on it. ;)

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131030/6e8921d3/attachment.sig>

From barry at python.org  Wed Oct 30 16:55:28 2013
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:55:28 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <52712708.2030302@jcea.es>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist>
 <CAPZV6o9sJpYdzE+L_EvqzHMt5JGpRUXQwAzorL=knjTOGtDx2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <52712708.2030302@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <20131030115528.14713554@anarchist>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Oct 30, 2013, at 04:34 PM, Jesus Cea wrote:

>Could I suggest to mark the branch as "closed" in Mercurial?. I still
>see it in "hg heads".

$ hg pull -u

/me replaces the time machine keys before Guido notices they were missing.

- -Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
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=dRg3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Wed Oct 30 23:03:28 2013
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:03:28 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Closing the 2.6 branch?
In-Reply-To: <20131030115425.06b3528f@anarchist>
References: <20131030101301.60c2e9f8@anarchist> <527116B8.2040709@v.loewis.de>
 <CADiSq7exg=A8ip8GZNsS65e4daTo3QQ8MnPrYweRyRjTZcg6rA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20131030115425.06b3528f@anarchist>
Message-ID: <CADiSq7cV8u=D=+emeOHRpRb7PLqs5Om3yBG5XwjFiXKxAbBnow@mail.gmail.com>

On 31 Oct 2013 01:54, "Barry Warsaw" <barry at python.org> wrote:
>
> On Oct 31, 2013, at 01:28 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> >There's a trick to get the PEP 0 generator to move the release PEP to the
> >historical section, too. I'd have to look at the source code to remember
> >what it is, though.
>
>         elif pep.type_ == 'Informational':
>             # Hack until the conflict between the use of "Final"
>             # for both API definition PEPs and other (actually
>             # obsolete) PEPs is addressed
>             if (pep.status == "Active" or
>                 "Release Schedule" not in pep.title):
>                 info.append(pep)
>             else:
>                 historical.append(pep)
>
> So PEP 361 (the 2.6/3.0 release schedule PEP) actually does end up in the
> Historical bin.  The PEP itself probably should have remained Active until
> yesterday.
>
> Do we want an explicit state for Status: Final -> Historical?
>
> (TBH, I don't care enough to do any work on it. ;)

Ah, you have divined the true reason why that hack is still there ;)

Cheers,
Nick.

>
> -Barry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20131031/0a805c6d/attachment.html>