Ned Deily added the comment: (Currently, it is not possible to edit a particular message in an issue. You could add a replacement comment to the issue and ask that the older message be delete.)
This seems to be a problem date. As documented, plistlib converts plist dates to/from Python datetime.datetime objects. And, as is documented from datetime objects, the year field must be between 1 (MINYEAR) and 9999 (MAXYEAR). So, it would appear that dates with year 0 are not representable as datetime objects; it's not obvious to me how plistlib could handle a date like that without changing the API, i.e. returning something other than a datetime object or by changing the rules for datetime objects, which is very unlikely to happen. https://docs.python.org/dev/library/plistlib.html https://docs.python.org/dev/library/datetime.html#datetime.MINYEAR ---------- nosy: +belopolsky, ned.deily, ronaldoussoren _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue22993> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
