Re: 3.2 (import and publisher issues)
Nicolas Lehuen wrote: MODPYTHON-34 has been fixed in the current version of the publisher, with the new importing system. As I've written before, I can roll back the part regarding the import system if you really want that, all the while maintaining the fix for MODPYTHON-34. I haven't had much to say on this topic (because I don't have a solid grasp of all the implications), but it seems like it's a real stumbling block for the release. I'd say if the current changes won't break any current code, or cause users unexpected behaviour, leave them in. Otherwise roll them back. It's better for the user to have to deal with old, documentented issues rather than discover brand new ones in their code, only to find we've changed the behaviour again in 3.3. Whichever route we take, we will obviously work on this further in 3.3 but for now let's get 3.2.0b out the door. Regards, Jim
Re: 3.2 (import and publisher issues)
I'd like to stress the fact that a lot of issues currently in JIRA are related to the publisher. We have worked on it to solve some of these issues. I have made sure that both the old version and the new version pass a series of unit tests. I can't be sure that those unit tests reflect the whole range of usage patterns people could have of the publisher, but anyway, it's better than nothing. So, I think we should move forward on the 3.2 release. The new publisher code is meant to make it work better, not worse, while retaining the compatibility with the current code. It's not a new publisher, it's a set of bug fixes. I mean, what is the purpose of releasing a new version of mod_python if we don't fix the dozen of bugs that are related to the publisher ? Regards, Nicolas2005/8/10, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nicolas Lehuen wrote: MODPYTHON-34 has been fixed in the current version of the publisher, with the new importing system. As I've written before, I can roll back the part regarding the import system if you really want that, all the while maintaining the fix for MODPYTHON-34.I haven't had much to say on this topic (because I don't have a solidgrasp of all the implications), but it seems like it's a real stumblingblock for the release. I'd say if the current changes won't break any current code, or causeusers unexpected behaviour, leave them in. Otherwise roll them back.It's better for the user to have to deal with old, documentented issues rather than discover brand new ones in their code, only to find we'vechanged the behaviour again in 3.3.Whichever route we take, we will obviously work on this further in 3.3but for now let's get 3.2.0b out the door.Regards,Jim
Re: 3.2 (import and publisher issues)
Nicolas Lehuen wrote: I'd like to stress the fact that a lot of issues currently in JIRA are related to the publisher. We have worked on it to solve some of these issues. I have made sure that both the old version and the new version pass a series of unit tests. I can't be sure that those unit tests reflect the whole range of usage patterns people could have of the publisher, but anyway, it's better than nothing. So, I think we should move forward on the 3.2 release. +1 The new publisher code is meant to make it work better, not worse, while retaining the compatibility with the current code. It's not a new publisher, it's a set of bug fixes. I mean, what is the purpose of releasing a new version of mod_python if we don't fix the dozen of bugs that are related to the publisher ? Regards, Nicolas 2005/8/10, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nicolas Lehuen wrote: MODPYTHON-34 has been fixed in the current version of the publisher, with the new importing system. As I've written before, I can roll back the part regarding the import system if you really want that, all the while maintaining the fix for MODPYTHON-34. I haven't had much to say on this topic (because I don't have a solid grasp of all the implications), but it seems like it's a real stumbling block for the release. I'd say if the current changes won't break any current code, or cause users unexpected behaviour, leave them in. Otherwise roll them back. It's better for the user to have to deal with old, documentented issues rather than discover brand new ones in their code, only to find we've changed the behaviour again in 3.3. Whichever route we take, we will obviously work on this further in 3.3 but for now let's get 3.2.0b out the door. Regards, Jim
