[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2015-01-11 Thread Antoine Pitrou

Antoine Pitrou added the comment:

I've committed your patches, Davin. Thank you for contributing!

--
nosy: +pitrou
resolution:  - fixed
stage: patch review - resolved
status: open - closed
versions:  -Python 3.6

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2015-01-11 Thread Roundup Robot

Roundup Robot added the comment:

New changeset e7d03a33e675 by Antoine Pitrou in branch '2.7':
Issue #22952: improve multiprocessing doc introduction and defer notes until 
appropriate.
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/e7d03a33e675

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2015-01-11 Thread Roundup Robot

Roundup Robot added the comment:

New changeset a9a9c71f8e15 by Antoine Pitrou in branch '3.4':
Issue #22952: improve multiprocessing doc introduction and defer notes until 
appropriate.
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a9a9c71f8e15

New changeset a65c23ea5f9e by Antoine Pitrou in branch 'default':
Issue #22952: improve multiprocessing doc introduction and defer notes until 
appropriate.
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a65c23ea5f9e

--
nosy: +python-dev

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-12-23 Thread Raymond Hettinger

Raymond Hettinger added the comment:

 Procedural question ... is a fix for this considered an enhancement?

Improvements to documentation are almost always backported.  The contrasts with 
code changes where enhancements (new features, optimizations, or refactorings) 
are made only on the latest development branch to reduce the risk of 
destabilizing code that has already shipped.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-12-22 Thread Davin Potts

Davin Potts added the comment:

Procedural question (wanting to understand the label given to this issue):  
when documentation does not adhere to the Python Developer's Guide, is a fix 
for this considered an enhancement?

--
versions: +Python 3.6

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-11-26 Thread Davin Potts

New submission from Davin Potts:

The introduction section of the multiprocessing module's documentation does not 
adhere to the python dev guidelines for keeping things in the affirmative tone.

Problem description:
Specifically, the intro section contains a warning block that, while conveying 
something important, both 1) potentially creates worry/concern in the mind of 
the reader new to this module, and 2) ideally belongs somewhere more 
relevant/appropriate than the intro section.  Also, the intro section contains 
an example code block that does not attempt to provide a simple example to 
advance understanding and boost the reader's confidence through trying this 
example -- instead it demonstrates what not to do and the consequences of doing 
so in an attempt to drive home one key point with the reader.

Suggested changes:
* The warning text block can be moved to a section discussing synchronization 
without losing the important information being shared or sharing it too late to 
be useful.
* To make the key point to the reader in the intro about the 
availability/importability of functions, etc. to child processes, the 
affirmative tone can be used in describing the good pattern/practice being 
employed in a usable/valid/working example.


Further comment:  Similar issues could be raised with other parts of the 
multiprocessing docs but this issue is concerned only with the intro section.

--
assignee: docs@python
components: Documentation
messages: 231731
nosy: davin, docs@python
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone
type: behavior
versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-11-26 Thread Davin Potts

Davin Potts added the comment:

Attached is a proposed patch for the 2.7 branch.

It provides 2 changes to the documentation:
1) Moves the warning text block regarding synchronization functionality not 
necessarily being available on all systems to the Synchronization between 
processes section (Section 16.6.1.3 in the 2.7 docs).
2) Adds a paragraph introducing (in the affirmative tone) a good/common 
practice as shown in a working example to drive home the key point about 
importability by subprocesses.  The original example of what not to do has been 
preserved by moving it to the Using a pool of workers section (Section 
16.6.1.5 in the 2.7 docs).

Note that this patch does not attempt to resolve the issue of :class:`Pool` not 
being resolved by Sphinx to properly point at the multiprocessing.pool.Pool 
class description.  This issue appears addressed in the 3.4 docs but not in 
some other branches.

--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37290/multiprocessing_27.patch

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-11-26 Thread Davin Potts

Davin Potts added the comment:

Attached is a proposed patch for the 3.4 branch.

The same modifications are made in this patch as in the patch for the 2.7 
branch, with two minor tweaks:
1) The affirmative tone example uses Pool in a with statement as is supported 
since 3.3.
2) References in the added/moved text are properly resolving (in Sphinx) to the 
class definition for Pool.


This patch should also work against the 3.3 branch (though should not be 
applied to 3.2 as the context manager behavior had not yet been added to Pool 
in 3.2 -- the example in the intro would need changing for this to be applied 
to 3.2 is all).

--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37291/multiprocessing_34.patch

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-11-26 Thread Berker Peksag

Changes by Berker Peksag berker.pek...@gmail.com:


--
nosy: +sbt
stage:  - patch review
type: behavior - enhancement
versions: +Python 3.5 -Python 3.2, Python 3.3

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-11-26 Thread Davin Potts

Changes by Davin Potts pyt...@discontinuity.net:


--
nosy: +rhettinger

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue22952] multiprocessing doc introduction not in affirmative tone

2014-11-26 Thread Raymond Hettinger

Raymond Hettinger added the comment:

+1 It looks like the relevant information has been preserved while adding an 
example where the module is being used as designed.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22952
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com