Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
I have backported r59654 as r67737. As indicated, the other patches are
not suitable for backporting.
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Guilherme Polo ggp...@gmail.com added the comment:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:15 AM, Martin v. Löwis rep...@bugs.python.org wrote:
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
I'm skeptical about backporting r59654. Doing so might break existing
applications.
I don't see in what
Guilherme Polo ggp...@gmail.com added the comment:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:21 AM, Martin v. Löwis rep...@bugs.python.org wrote:
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Can you remind me what problem was fixed with r59653? I can't find the
Tk tracker anymore on which this
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
I don't see in what way it would break existing applications. The
indices returned by that command in Tcl should all be represented as
strings in Python, so I see this at max causing a double attempt to
convert it to str.
I can't quite
Guilherme Polo ggp...@gmail.com added the comment:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Martin v. Löwis rep...@bugs.python.org wrote:
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
I don't see in what way it would break existing applications. The
indices returned by that command in Tcl
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Are we talking about the same commit ? 59654 as in your original about
it breaking existing code.
Oops, no. I now see that r59654 is fine for backporting. My last message
was about r59653, which probably does introduce backward
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I'm skeptical about backporting r59654. Doing so might break existing
applications.
--
nosy: +loewis
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue4342
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Can you remind me what problem was fixed with r59653? I can't find the
Tk tracker anymore on which this apparently was reported.
If it fixes a problem with supporting Tcl 8.5, then I will also reject
the request. Supporting Tcl 8.5 is a new
Changes by Guilherme Polo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
priority: - release blocker
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue4342
___
___
New submission from Guilherme Polo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please consider backporting r59653 and r59654 to release25-maint branch.
It may be of interest to backport r52688 too, also, r63776 together with
r63914 (without these last two I get segfault when passing a list as an
option value).
Finally
10 matches
Mail list logo
