From larry at hastings.org  Wed Nov  4 23:06:32 2015
From: larry at hastings.org (Larry Hastings)
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 20:06:32 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] Python 3.5.1 release schedule
Message-ID: <563AD5C8.7040600@hastings.org>


At the request of the platform experts, 3.5.1 is now scheduled to happen 
simultaneously with 2.7.11.  That means:

Saturday November 21, 2015
     tag 3.5.1rc1

Sunday November 22, 2015
     release 3.5.1rc1

Saturday December 5, 2015
     tag 3.5.1 final

Sunday December 6, 2015
     release 3.5.1 final

I'll update the release schedule soon,


//arry/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20151104/2a7e5818/attachment.html>

From ethan at stoneleaf.us  Sat Nov  7 09:35:25 2015
From: ethan at stoneleaf.us (Ethan Furman)
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2015 06:35:25 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] MSDN Subscription Expired
Message-ID: <563E0C2D.7050104@stoneleaf.us>

Woops.

Can I get it renewed?

--
~Ethan~

From brian at python.org  Sat Nov  7 09:57:27 2015
From: brian at python.org (Brian Curtin)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 08:57:27 -0600
Subject: [python-committers] MSDN Subscription Expired
In-Reply-To: <563E0C2D.7050104@stoneleaf.us>
References: <563E0C2D.7050104@stoneleaf.us>
Message-ID: <CAD+XWwp-9yo4m2hcjLzP-ZUjNryspYkaMjm6wPnTMH_c96jS6A@mail.gmail.com>

On Saturday, November 7, 2015, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:

> Woops.
>
> Can I get it renewed?
>

Does anyone else need a renewal? It's easier on the Microsoft end if I send
them in a batch.

All I need is the email associated with the account and your Subscriber ID.

Brian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20151107/49013913/attachment.html>

From yselivanov.ml at gmail.com  Wed Nov 18 17:40:44 2015
From: yselivanov.ml at gmail.com (Yury Selivanov)
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:40:44 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] emails from bugs.python.org are marker as spam
Message-ID: <564CFE6C.5040208@gmail.com>

Most of the emails from bugs.python.org (and review tool) end up being 
marked as spam in gmail.  I consistently miss 70% of them. Is it 
possible to fix this?

Yury

From antoine at python.org  Wed Nov 18 17:46:32 2015
From: antoine at python.org (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 23:46:32 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] emails from bugs.python.org are marker as
 spam
In-Reply-To: <564CFE6C.5040208@gmail.com>
References: <564CFE6C.5040208@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <564CFFC8.9040104@python.org>



Le 18/11/2015 23:40, Yury Selivanov a ?crit :
> Most of the emails from bugs.python.org (and review tool) end up being 
> marked as spam in gmail.  I consistently miss 70% of them. Is it 
> possible to fix this?

I don't know what gmail says about this, but many conversations on
python-dev and python-ideas seem like pointless spam anyway... strange
coincidence? :-)

Regards

Antoine.

From ezio.melotti at gmail.com  Wed Nov 18 17:49:14 2015
From: ezio.melotti at gmail.com (Ezio Melotti)
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 00:49:14 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] emails from bugs.python.org are marker as
 spam
In-Reply-To: <564CFE6C.5040208@gmail.com>
References: <564CFE6C.5040208@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACBhJdEETmgsmLD6NTQY2jG78V0SYL+6gHb=vw7GDkboFaZmdA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Yury Selivanov
<yselivanov.ml at gmail.com> wrote:
> Most of the emails from bugs.python.org (and review tool) end up being
> marked as spam in gmail.  I consistently miss 70% of them. Is it possible to
> fix this?
>

A quick workaround is to create a GMail filter and check "never send to spam".

The issue is also being discussed at
http://psf.upfronthosting.co.za/roundup/meta/issue562

Best Regards,
Ezio Melotti

> Yury

From yselivanov.ml at gmail.com  Wed Nov 18 18:09:39 2015
From: yselivanov.ml at gmail.com (Yury Selivanov)
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 18:09:39 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] emails from bugs.python.org are marker as
 spam
In-Reply-To: <CACBhJdEETmgsmLD6NTQY2jG78V0SYL+6gHb=vw7GDkboFaZmdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <564CFE6C.5040208@gmail.com>
 <CACBhJdEETmgsmLD6NTQY2jG78V0SYL+6gHb=vw7GDkboFaZmdA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <564D0533.5020104@gmail.com>



On 2015-11-18 5:49 PM, Ezio Melotti wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Yury Selivanov
> <yselivanov.ml at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> >Most of the emails from bugs.python.org (and review tool) end up being
>> >marked as spam in gmail.  I consistently miss 70% of them. Is it possible to
>> >fix this?
>> >
> A quick workaround is to create a GMail filter and check "never send to spam".

Great idea, thanks!

Yury

From larry at hastings.org  Sun Nov 22 03:12:35 2015
From: larry at hastings.org (Larry Hastings)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 00:12:35 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] Release schedule for 3.4.4
Message-ID: <565178F3.5070701@hastings.org>



Sorry for the short notice of this schedule, but... here goes:

    Sat Dec 05 - tag 3.4.4rc1
    Sun Dec 06 - release 3.4.4rc1
    Sat Dec 19 - tag 3.4.4 final
    Sun Dec 20 - release 3.4.4 final


The reason for the short notice: we may have to change personnel for 
this release, and we need to work around some holiday vacation schedules 
too.  However, note that we have two weeks for the RC release.  Because 
of the short notice, I plan to be a little more flexible about changes 
between RC1 and final.  It also means we can pretty easily add a second 
RC if we need to.

Unless something amazing happens, 3.4.4 will be the final release of 3.4 
with binary installers.  3.4 will also move into "security fixes only" 
mode at that time.


Best wishes, and again my apologies for the short notice,


//arry/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20151122/6b13a91b/attachment.html>

From tjreedy at udel.edu  Sun Nov 22 12:38:41 2015
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:38:41 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Release schedule for 3.4.4
In-Reply-To: <565178F3.5070701@hastings.org>
References: <565178F3.5070701@hastings.org>
Message-ID: <5651FDA1.7080303@udel.edu>

On 11/22/2015 3:12 AM, Larry Hastings wrote:
>
>
> Sorry for the short notice of this schedule, but... here goes:
>
>     Sat Dec 05 - tag 3.4.4rc1
>     Sun Dec 06 - release 3.4.4rc1
>     Sat Dec 19 - tag 3.4.4 final
>     Sun Dec 20 - release 3.4.4 final

This is exactly what I inferred when you said 'a month' about two weeks 
ago.  What I would like a day or two ahead is the time (UTC) when you 
will tag, or at least the earliest you will tag, on  the 5th.

Terry


From zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com  Mon Nov 23 01:58:01 2015
From: zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com (Zachary Ware)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 00:58:01 -0600
Subject: [python-committers] New installed Python builders
Message-ID: <CAKJDb-NQM1+j28AyQSg5=9owWKDGEhKgfkm2MvLWUts98gwyLQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

Inspired by a couple of issues about testing installed Python that
popped up this morning (#25694 and #25696), I've set up a new set of
builders[1] to build, install, and test the installed Python.  They
run on the same slave that runs my "x86 Gentoo Non-Debug with X"
builders.

If you are interested, please have a look at how they do what they do,
and let me know if you see any issues with how it's set up.  Since the
3.x builder is not failing, I'm not sure whether the issues have been
fixed or if I messed something up in the setup :)

[1] http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.x
    http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.5
    http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.4
    http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%202.7

Regards,
-- 
Zach

From larry at hastings.org  Mon Nov 23 02:16:44 2015
From: larry at hastings.org (Larry Hastings)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:16:44 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] [RELEASED] Python 3.5.1rc1 is now available
Message-ID: <5652BD5C.6040107@hastings.org>


On behalf of the Python development community and the Python 3.5 release 
team, I'm pleased to announce the availability of Python 3.5.1rc1.  
Python 3.5.1 will be the first update for Python 3.5.  Python 3.5 is the 
newest version of the Python language, and it contains many exciting new 
features and optimizations.


You can see what's changed in Python 3.5.1rc1 (as compared to 3.5.0) here:

    https://docs.python.org/3.5/whatsnew/changelog.html


And you can download Python 3.5.1 here:

    https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-351rc1/

Windows and Mac users: please read the important platform-specific 
"Notes on this release" section near the end of that page.



We hope you enjoy Python 3.5.1!


//arry/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20151122/b2c70690/attachment.html>

From larry at hastings.org  Mon Nov 23 02:47:33 2015
From: larry at hastings.org (Larry Hastings)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:47:33 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] Reminder: checkins into 3.5 after rc1 won't
 automatically go into final
Message-ID: <5652C495.2080804@hastings.org>



3.5.1rc1 is tagged, merged, and pushed back into the central repo. At 
this point I don't plan to merge further changes from hg.python.org into 
3.5.1 final.  If you have an important bug fix that didn't make it into 
3.5.1rc1 and *has* to go into 3.5.1 final, add me to the issue and we'll 
talk about it.  If it happens I'll have to manually cherry-pick the change.

I've added a 3.5.2rc1 section to Misc/NEWS; please add new entries there.

Happy holidays,


//arry/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20151122/eb4148aa/attachment.html>

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Mon Nov 23 11:00:45 2015
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:00:45 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] New installed Python builders
In-Reply-To: <CAKJDb-NQM1+j28AyQSg5=9owWKDGEhKgfkm2MvLWUts98gwyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKJDb-NQM1+j28AyQSg5=9owWKDGEhKgfkm2MvLWUts98gwyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20151123160046.7D999B140A1@webabinitio.net>

On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 00:58:01 -0600, Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Inspired by a couple of issues about testing installed Python that
> popped up this morning (#25694 and #25696), I've set up a new set of
> builders[1] to build, install, and test the installed Python.  They
> run on the same slave that runs my "x86 Gentoo Non-Debug with X"
> builders.
> 
> If you are interested, please have a look at how they do what they do,
> and let me know if you see any issues with how it's set up.  Since the
> 3.x builder is not failing, I'm not sure whether the issues have been
> fixed or if I messed something up in the setup :)
> 
> [1] http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.x
>     http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.5
>     http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.4
>     http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%202.7

I haven't looked at this, but unless the buildbot does *not* have write
access to the installed directories (ie: the install was done as another
user) it isn't really doing a full installed python test.

--David

From storchaka at gmail.com  Mon Nov 23 12:11:15 2015
From: storchaka at gmail.com (Serhiy Storchaka)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 19:11:15 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] New installed Python builders
In-Reply-To: <20151123160046.7D999B140A1@webabinitio.net>
References: <CAKJDb-NQM1+j28AyQSg5=9owWKDGEhKgfkm2MvLWUts98gwyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151123160046.7D999B140A1@webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <n2vhbj$hfe$1@ger.gmane.org>

On 23.11.15 18:00, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 00:58:01 -0600, Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Inspired by a couple of issues about testing installed Python that
>> popped up this morning (#25694 and #25696), I've set up a new set of
>> builders[1] to build, install, and test the installed Python.  They
>> run on the same slave that runs my "x86 Gentoo Non-Debug with X"
>> builders.
>>
>> If you are interested, please have a look at how they do what they do,
>> and let me know if you see any issues with how it's set up.  Since the
>> 3.x builder is not failing, I'm not sure whether the issues have been
>> fixed or if I messed something up in the setup :)
>>
>> [1] http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.x
>>      http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.5
>>      http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%203.4
>>      http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Gentoo%20Installed%20with%20X%202.7
>
> I haven't looked at this, but unless the buildbot does *not* have write
> access to the installed directories (ie: the install was done as another
> user) it isn't really doing a full installed python test.

Yes, but at least it catches cases where some files are not installed. 
There were few issues with this.



From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Mon Nov 23 16:11:19 2015
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 16:11:19 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] New installed Python builders
In-Reply-To: <n2vhbj$hfe$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CAKJDb-NQM1+j28AyQSg5=9owWKDGEhKgfkm2MvLWUts98gwyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151123160046.7D999B140A1@webabinitio.net> <n2vhbj$hfe$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <20151123211120.338A1B140A1@webabinitio.net>

On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 19:11:15 +0200, Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23.11.15 18:00, R. David Murray wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 00:58:01 -0600, Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I haven't looked at this, but unless the buildbot does *not* have write
> > access to the installed directories (ie: the install was done as another
> > user) it isn't really doing a full installed python test.
> 
> Yes, but at least it catches cases where some files are not installed. 
> There were few issues with this.

True.  Something incomplete in this vein is better than nothing.  I'm
Not sure you should call it "Installed" though, as that will be a bit
misleading.  Most of the "can't run the tests on installed python" bugs
are because the tree is read-only (obviously, not all of them!).
Maybe call it "local install"?  Wordy, I know, but more accurate.

--David

From zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com  Fri Nov 27 00:37:40 2015
From: zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com (Zachary Ware)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 23:37:40 -0600
Subject: [python-committers] [Python-buildbots] New installed Python
 builders
In-Reply-To: <20151123211120.338A1B140A1@webabinitio.net>
References: <CAKJDb-NQM1+j28AyQSg5=9owWKDGEhKgfkm2MvLWUts98gwyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151123160046.7D999B140A1@webabinitio.net> <n2vhbj$hfe$1@ger.gmane.org>
 <20151123211120.338A1B140A1@webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <CAKJDb-PB3Kra_EDLC2Qsx2yd48U9vVLyFdBHF6f0=cQyghYddQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:11 PM, R. David Murray <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 19:11:15 +0200, Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 23.11.15 18:00, R. David Murray wrote:
>> > On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 00:58:01 -0600, Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pydev at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I haven't looked at this, but unless the buildbot does *not* have write
>> > access to the installed directories (ie: the install was done as another
>> > user) it isn't really doing a full installed python test.
>>
>> Yes, but at least it catches cases where some files are not installed.
>> There were few issues with this.
>
> True.  Something incomplete in this vein is better than nothing.  I'm
> Not sure you should call it "Installed" though, as that will be a bit
> misleading.  Most of the "can't run the tests on installed python" bugs
> are because the tree is read-only (obviously, not all of them!).
> Maybe call it "local install"?  Wordy, I know, but more accurate.

I've gone with attempting to make it more like a 'real' install, by
wrapping the test step with appropriate 'chmod' commands to make the
install directory not writable, and confirmed during a test run that
the entire installed tree is -w.  I also fixed the slave's usage of
usePTY (for test_curses) to avoid the failures that had been happening
in the 'uninstall' step.

-- 
Zach

From ethan at stoneleaf.us  Sun Nov 29 15:28:01 2015
From: ethan at stoneleaf.us (Ethan Furman)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:28:01 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] MSDN Subscription Expired
In-Reply-To: <CAD+XWwp-9yo4m2hcjLzP-ZUjNryspYkaMjm6wPnTMH_c96jS6A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <563E0C2D.7050104@stoneleaf.us>
 <CAD+XWwp-9yo4m2hcjLzP-ZUjNryspYkaMjm6wPnTMH_c96jS6A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <565B5FD1.6020305@stoneleaf.us>

On 11/07/2015 06:57 AM, Brian Curtin wrote:

 > All I need is the email associated with the account and your
 > Subscriber ID.

I haven't heard anything yet, did I miss something?

--
~Ethan~