On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Dmitry Vasiliev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, I think the following issues should be also marked as release blockers:
Agreed and done.
- http://bugs.python.org/issue3714 (nntplib module broken by str to
unicode conversion)
- http://bugs.python.org/issue3725
Here's some I found from a few minutes of futzing around with r66821 of
py3k on Linux.
- Having os.getcwdb isn't much use when you can't even run python in
the first place when the current directory has bad bytes in it.
That's not true: it *is* of much use. Python will live in /usr/bin,
2008/10/6 Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 2
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
Given what still needs to be done, is this a reasonable schedule? Do we
need two more betas?
Yes to both questions.
I agree with you here.
I'm
On Oct 7, 2008, at 3:47 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
- Having os.getcwdb isn't much use when you can't even run python in
the first place when the current directory has bad bytes in it.
That's not true: it *is* of much use. Python will live in /usr/bin,
which has a nicely-decodable path.
James Y Knight wrote:
or at least fully recognized and documented as a half-baked
solution.
I would prefer that, leaving a full resolution to 3.1 (or perhaps 3.2).
If we wait long enough, the issue will disappear (a strategy that Sun
is apparently taking for Java :-)
Regards,
Martin
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0. My
suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 2
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
Given what still needs to be done, is this a
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 9:51 AM, James Y Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 7, 2008, at 3:47 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
- Having os.getcwdb isn't much use when you can't even run python in
the first place when the current directory has bad bytes in it.
That's not true: it *is* of much
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 6, 2008, at 9:48 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[Barry Warsaw]
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0.
My suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 2
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
Given what still needs to be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0.
My
suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-Nov-2008 3.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 5:47 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 6, 2008, at 9:48 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[Barry Warsaw]
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0.
My suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 rc 2
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 4
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
I've updated PEP 361 and the Google calendar with this schedule,
except that the PEP says that rc3 and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 7, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I won't be able to cut another release between the 15th and 5th, so
at least that one should be 2 weeks. If we don't need the
additional rc, then we can release early, which would put us just
On Oct 7, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Adam Olsen wrote:
So what does Qt do when given a file name already using those PUA?
Looks like they get passed through untouched when decoded, but will
get translated into invalid names upon encoding.
Well, I'd say that looks like a bug. It should probably decode
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0. My
suggestion:
15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 2
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
On Oct 6, 2008, at 8:52 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
I'm not sure we do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the big ticket,
issue bytes/unicode filepaths, has been resolved. And looking at the
tracker, I only see 18 release blockers.
Well, if you mean that the resolution decided upon is to simply
15 matches
Mail list logo
