[back on the list]
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:24:16PM -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Turned out to be a rebuild::
>
>
> r65077 = 82d954e8c20c91562c4c660859d17756cba10992
> r65082 = 1c75cce93c2ef2ec87e801888638cfdf5d2ff29a
> r65085 = 3143c2fbe7315afd29496dc0cdac3122bed30536
> Done rebuilding .g
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Can we push branches?
>
> The git-daemon is setup as read-only. If you have write access to
> the SVN repository then you can push back changes using git-svn.
> That's qui
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Mark Hammond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Let's just make assertRaises return the exception instance, it seems
>> >> like it feels the need correctly.
>> >
>> > and I meant "fills", not "feels", obviously...
>>
>> +1 : enriching the existing method in a way that
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>>
>>> bsddb is in a very bad shape, as the 2.6 code hasn't been merged into
>>> 3k. I somewh
> I would like to know how much the AST have been changed on moving from
> python2.4 to python 2.5 so that I can bring the corresponding changes
> in Zope2 to get it adapted to those changes in the AST.
Notice that Parser/Python.asdl is new in Python 2.5, so (by today's
terminology) Python 2.4 di
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The releases have been made, so both the 3.0 branch and the trunk (2.6) are
> now open for commits. Remember, there's only one more planned beta, and we
> /really/ want to try to hit the October 1st deadline. Let's do ever
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The releases have been made, so both the 3.0 branch and the trunk
(2.6) are now open for commits. Remember, there's only one more
planned beta, and we /really/ want to try to hit the October 1st
deadline. Let's do everything we can to stabiliz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I
am happy to announce the second beta releases of Python 2.6 and Python
3.0.
Please note that these are beta releases, and as such are not suitable
for production environments
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 17, 2008, at 10:37 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
bsddb is in a very bad shape, as the 2.6 code hasn't been merged
in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please, no checkins on the 3.0 or 2.6 branches until further notice.
We're a go with the releases tonight. Email is not the quickest way
to get my attention. For that, use irc on freenode, #python-dev.
- -Barry
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Hi ,
I am really sorry that I couldn,t make clear in the first mail that
What I actually need. But Shane and my Gsoc mentor Sidnei have already
made it clear I think.
I would like to know how much the AST have been changed on moving from
python2.4 to python 2.5 so that I can bring the correspondi
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>
>> bsddb is in a very bad shape, as the 2.6 code hasn't been merged into
>> 3k. I somewhat doubt that this gets resolved before the release, so
>> bsddb users might need t
On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
bsddb is in a very bad shape, as the 2.6 code hasn't been merged into
3k. I somewhat doubt that this gets resolved before the release, so
bsddb users might need to skip 3.0.
In fact, bsddb as packages in core Python has rarely been in good sh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 17, 2008, at 09:57 AM, Steve Holden wrote:
>Barry Warsaw wrote:
>[...]
>>
>> I'll note that I plan to hold the beta3 releases until all release
>> blocker and deferred blockers are resolved.
>>
>Ian Ozsvald of ShowMeDo.com noticed a blog pos
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 18, 2008, at 01:27 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> The Windows buildbots are not very happy, though. test_ssl and
>> test_bsddb and constantly failing on both the trunk and py3k. I don't
>> know much about either of these items (or Windows for th
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:27 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The Windows buildbots are not very happy, though. test_ssl and
>> test_bsddb and constantly failing on both the trunk and py3k. I don't
>> know much about either of these items (or Windows for that matter), so
>> any h
> The Windows buildbots are not very happy, though. test_ssl and
> test_bsddb and constantly failing on both the trunk and py3k. I don't
> know much about either of these items (or Windows for that matter), so
> any help would be greatly appreciated.
bsddb is in a very bad shape, as the 2.6 code h
> >> Let's just make assertRaises return the exception instance, it seems
> >> like it feels the need correctly.
> >
> > and I meant "fills", not "feels", obviously...
>
> +1 : enriching the existing method in a way that's perfectly
> transparent and innocuous to all existing uses _feels_ right, b
Guido van Rossum wrote:
Suggestion for people asking developers to look into issues: indicate
more than the issue number in the email. Show the issue summary, other
relevant metadata, and what needs to be done in some detail. This will
pique the interest of those who *can* help (and allow people
Tres Seaver wrote:
Ron Adam wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
The essence of the function remains unchanged - you're still asserting
that a particular exception is raised. Returning the actual exception
object that was caught is merely a convenience that makes a lot of sense.
I'm not sure I unders
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Sidnei da Silva
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"""
The safety of RestrictedPython has been validated in a somewhat formal
process with Python 2.4. Ranjith is working to validate it with
Python 2.5. He is first working to discover all cha
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Sidnei da Silva
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thanks. Then python-dev is *definitely* the wrong forum. :-)
>
> Definitely wrong forum for RestrictedPython-specifc questions, but not
> if
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks. Then python-dev is *definitely* the wrong forum. :-)
Definitely wrong forum for RestrictedPython-specifc questions, but not
if you consider those two paragraphs from Shane's email, which clarify
that Ranjith is
These requests always have a higher probability of being addressed if
you summarize the issue in the request.
Bill
> Can anyone look at the patch for Issue2944?
>
> I hope the issue can be fixed before the release of python 2.6.
___
Python-Dev mailin
Thanks. Then python-dev is *definitely* the wrong forum. :-)
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:27 AM 7/17/2008 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:54 AM, ranjith kannikara
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I have taken the g
Suggestion for people asking developers to look into issues: indicate
more than the issue number in the email. Show the issue summary, other
relevant metadata, and what needs to be done in some detail. This will
pique the interest of those who *can* help (and allow people who can't
help anyway to s
At 11:27 AM 7/17/2008 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:54 AM, ranjith kannikara
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have taken the gsoc 08 project of porting zope2 to python2.5.
> Through my way to the successful completion of the project I have to
> implement Restricted python i
Can anyone look at the patch for Issue2944?
I hope the issue can be fixed before the release of python 2.6.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman
Thomas Heller wrote:
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: "Eric Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have this ready for checkin (with docs and tests). I'd like to get it
in for this beta, since it does involved changed behavior
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> From: "Eric Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>> I have this ready for checkin (with docs and tests). I'd like to get it
>>> in for this beta, since it does involved changed behavior, no matt
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:54 AM, ranjith kannikara
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have taken the gsoc 08 project of porting zope2 to python2.5.
>> Through my way to the successful completion of the project I have to
>>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:54 AM, ranjith kannikara
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have taken the gsoc 08 project of porting zope2 to python2.5.
> Through my way to the successful completion of the project I have to
> implement Restricted python in Zope2. I could only get the information
> that th
> The Windows buildbots are not very happy, though. test_ssl ...
> constantly failing on both the trunk and py3k.
I've checked in patches for test_ssl on both branches. Let's see how
the Windows buildbots do.
Bill
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev
I have taken the gsoc 08 project of porting zope2 to python2.5.
Through my way to the successful completion of the project I have to
implement Restricted python in Zope2. I could only get the information
that the python AST has not changed on moving from python2.4 to 2.5
but Restricted Python is n
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Jesse Noller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> We have green buildbots, yay! Thanks everyone for that.
>>
>> However, we still have three
> > test_ssl ... constantly failing on both the trunk and py3k.
>
> I'll take a closer look at this. It's the new test added in lately.
> Seems to be working on non-Windows platforms, so I'm guessing it's
> some Windows oddity, which I'm not very good at diagnosing. Worst
> comes to worst, we ca
Please move all discussions of unittest frameworks to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] It is an interesting topic -- so interesting,
in fact, that exploring all the different ideas under discussion is
overwhelming the primary purpose of python-dev, which at this point is
to get the 2.6 and 3.0 releases into shape
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ron Adam wrote:
>
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> The essence of the function remains unchanged - you're still asserting
>> that a particular exception is raised. Returning the actual exception
>> object that was caught is merely a convenience that makes
> test_ssl ... constantly failing on both the trunk and py3k.
I'll take a closer look at this. It's the new test added in lately.
Seems to be working on non-Windows platforms, so I'm guessing it's
some Windows oddity, which I'm not very good at diagnosing. Worst
comes to worst, we can take out t
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Eric Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> I have this ready for checkin (with docs and tests). I'd like to get it
>> in for this beta, since it does involved changed behavior, no matter how
>> small ('1e+100' become
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Jesse Noller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:16 AM, Jesse Noller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 3375: Guido (thanks guido) looked into this, and while I banged my
From: "Eric Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have this ready for checkin (with docs and tests). I'd like to get it
in for this beta, since it does involved changed behavior, no matter how
small ('1e+100' becomes '1E+100' with '%F'). But it relies on the
platform's vsnprintf to do the right thing wi
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Taking an existing function such as assertRaises and going "hey, we
aren't using the return value from this, wouldn't it be really
convenient if it told us the exact exception it actually caught?"
doesn't cause any problems for existing code, and makes it much easier
to
Eric Smith wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
It shares code with %-formatting. Change that, too? I couldn't find
any
occurrences of %F in the stdlib. Not that that's the entire
universe, of
course.
The change is slightly less elegant if I don't change %-formatting, but
still doable, especial
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> We have green buildbots, yay! Thanks everyone for that.
The Windows buildbots are not very happy, though. test_ssl and
test_bsddb and constantly failing on both the trun
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:16 AM, Jesse Noller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 3375: Guido (thanks guido) looked into this, and while I banged my
>> head on it a lot yesterday - guido's identified the issue, and now I
>> n
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:54 AM, Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I said:
>> Let's just make assertRaises return the exception instance, it seems like it
>> feels the need correctly.
>
> and I meant "fills", not "feels", obviously...
+1 : enriching the existing method in a way that's
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:16 AM, Jesse Noller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3375: Guido (thanks guido) looked into this, and while I banged my
> head on it a lot yesterday - guido's identified the issue, and now I
> need to figure out a fix - help is welcome on this one.
You're welcome. I would hav
Barry Warsaw wrote:
[...]
I'll note that I plan to hold the beta3 releases until all release
blocker and deferred blockers are resolved.
Ian Ozsvald of ShowMeDo.com noticed a blog post of mine about this beta,
and responded as follows:
Re.
http://holdenweb.blogspot.com/2008/07/cpython-ge
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> We have green buildbots, yay! Thanks everyone for that.
>
> However, we still have three release blocker issues that I am not
> comfortable deferring.
>
> 3088 test_multi
Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For what it's worth, I've been using nose for quite a long time and
> the first reason I did so is, like you, because I wanted to write
> tests in a light way (without having to declare classes).
>
> Then after writing some dozens of tests I switched b
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
(especially when you come to have setup/teardown functions shared by several
tests).
These days, I tend to just write a context manager for common
setup/teardown code rather than using the setUp/tearDown hooks (at least
for Python's own test suite, where I have the luxur
Ben Finney wrote:
The function name should say *all* that the function does, from the
perspective of the caller.
I have to disagree with that (and I think you'll find plenty of other
folks here will disagree as well). A good function names needs to have a
few characters:
- serve as a mnemonic
I said:
> Let's just make assertRaises return the exception instance, it seems like it
> feels the need correctly.
and I meant "fills", not "feels", obviously...
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinf
Fred Drake acm.org> writes:
>
> Sounds like adding a new method, catchException(...), that returns the
> exception it catches, would be a reasonable compromise. I can't think
> of any reason that the method that catches-and-returns needs to be the
> existing API, which does something diffe
Steven D'Aprano pearwood.info> writes:
>
> I am interested in this suggestion. I didn't know about py.test.
>
> I admit to dissatisfaction with unittest (too Java-ish and heavyweight
> for my tastes). I would love a test suite midway in weight between
> doctests and unittest, so I will check i
56 matches
Mail list logo
