[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

R. David Murray added the comment: Since boost has changed their code and no one else has reported a problem and 2.6 is now in bug fix only mode, I'm going to close this as out of date (sorry I overlooked it for 2.6.5). If anyone disagrees, let me know what we should change and why in 2.7.

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Changes by Éric Araujo : -- versions: +Python 2.7 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.py

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Changes by Senthil Kumaran : -- nosy: +pveloz ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Moriyoshi Koizumi added the comment: See my comment on issue #5890. I attached a patch to solve the Boost.Python issue. -- nosy: +moriyoshi ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Barry A. Warsaw added the comment: After discussion on python-dev, this will not block 2.6.4 -- priority: release blocker -> high ___ Python tracker ___ _

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

R. David Murray added the comment: I'm not sure you do. I have no idea how Boost works, but the fact that removing a Boost 'read-only' declaration circumvents the problem in at least some cases argues that Boost is setting _something_ read-only. --

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I'm not sure I understand, how do you create a "read-only instance dict"? -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker ___ __

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Barry A. Warsaw added the comment: Thanks David, that's what I suspect too (that's its a problem with extension types). Unless we get more information, I'm not inclined to hold up the 2.6.4 release for this. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

R. David Murray added the comment: That should have been 'instance's dict', not the subclass dict. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Pytho

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

R. David Murray added the comment: I added some tests in test_property in my checkout and the __doc__ property is not, as far as I can tell, set read-only by the issue 5890 fix. The error message referenced in the report is: AttributeError: 'Boost.Python.StaticProperty' object attribute '__doc

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Barry A. Warsaw added the comment: Robert indicated later that this probably did /not/ affect Bazaar. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Py

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Barry A. Warsaw added the comment: Apparently this affects more than just Boost. lifeless (Robert Collins) tells me that "__doc__ becoming readonly buggered some code of ours in bzr too, IIRC". He thinks it was in pure Python (i.e. not extension code). Does anybody have a pure Python reproduc

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

Barry A. Warsaw added the comment: I think this is caused by the fix for bug 5890 and isn't a regression. -- nosy: +barry ___ Python tracker ___ _

[issue7183] did 2.6.3 regress for some uses of the __doc__ property?

New submission from Zooko O'Whielacronx : According to https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/boost1.38/+bug/457688 , Python 2.6.3 stopped working for something that Python 2.6.2 worked for, involving Boost. Andrew Mitchell looked at the Python 2.6.3 release notes, saw http://bugs.py