Congratulations Victor! This is not a small feat. The PSU should send
you cookies to thank you, but they won’t since they don’t exist and
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On 10/18/2010 08:53 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
Seven months after my first commit related to this issue, the full test suite
of Python 3.2 pass with ASCII, ISO-8859-1 and UTF-8 locale encodings in a non-
ascii source directory. It means that Python 3.2 now process correctly
filenames in all
On 10/18/2010 07:07 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
Seriously, though, what it indicates is indicates is that we need a unit
test for the patch to be complete. We have a number of issues with
patches but no tests, I believe. Which order 'unit test' and 'fix'
occur in is arbitrary in practice. I
Hi,
Seven months after my first commit related to this issue, the full test suite
of Python 3.2 pass with ASCII, ISO-8859-1 and UTF-8 locale encodings in a non-
ascii source directory. It means that Python 3.2 now process correctly
filenames in all modules, build scripts and other utilities, wit
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 21:42:08 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 21:31:24 +0200
> Georg Brandl wrote:
> >
> > This is probably sophistry, but if an issue is invalid, it doesn't need
> > a patch :)
>
> Not only, but it generally gets closed too.
>
> > The first stage seems to be
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:20:13 +0200, wrote:
> Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
> interpretations of the âacceptedâ resolution:
>
> > Traditionally it denotes an approved patch, not a agreement that the
> > bug is valid.
>
> Daniel Stutzbach and I are (were) tw
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 21:31:24 +0200
Georg Brandl wrote:
>
> This is probably sophistry, but if an issue is invalid, it doesn't need
> a patch :)
Not only, but it generally gets closed too.
> The first stage seems to be "unit test needed" anyway, which
> sounds to me a bit like "needs to be check
On 10/18/2010 3:33 PM, Janzert wrote:
http://xiph.org/video/vid1.shtml
Sorry, sent to the wrong place.
Janzert
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org
http://xiph.org/video/vid1.shtml
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Am 18.10.2010 21:28, schrieb Michael Foord:
> On 18/10/2010 20:24, Georg Brandl wrote:
>> Am 18.10.2010 21:04, schrieb Michael Foord:
>>>On 18/10/2010 19:18, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 18.10.2010 20:11, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 04:04 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
>
>>
On 18/10/2010 20:24, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 18.10.2010 21:04, schrieb Michael Foord:
On 18/10/2010 19:18, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 18.10.2010 20:11, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Oct 18, 2010, at 04:04 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
inte
Am 18.10.2010 21:04, schrieb Michael Foord:
> On 18/10/2010 19:18, Georg Brandl wrote:
>> Am 18.10.2010 20:11, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
>>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 04:04 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
>>>
Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
interpretations of the “accepte
On 18/10/2010 19:18, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 18.10.2010 20:11, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Oct 18, 2010, at 04:04 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
interpretations of the “accepted” resolution:
Traditionally it denotes an approved patch, no
Am 18.10.2010 20:11, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 04:04 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
>
>>Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
>>interpretations of the “accepted” resolution:
>>
>>> Traditionally it denotes an approved patch, not a agreement that the
>>> bug is
On Oct 18, 2010, at 04:04 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
>Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
>interpretations of the “accepted” resolution:
>
>> Traditionally it denotes an approved patch, not a agreement that the
>> bug is valid.
I'm with Raymond; I've always used 'accepte
Hi everyone
Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
interpretations of the “accepted” resolution:
> Traditionally it denotes an approved patch, not a agreement that the
> bug is valid.
Daniel Stutzbach and I are (were) two users of the second meaning. It’s
more useful
Hello Chandrasekar,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 10:05:56PM +0530, chandru wrote:
> I am waiting for the bug Issue5111 (httplib: wrong Host header when connecting
> to IPv6 litteral URL) to be fixed for a very long.
I just had a look at the bug. Looks like a minor change and tests are
there too. I sh
Hello
(A bit of context: The original message comes from bug #2775, “Implement
PEP 3108”, a meta-bug tracking stdlib reorganization for py3k.)
> I am very glad you're reorganizing the Standard Library. Thumbs up! I
> hope everything will comply to PEP 8 after you're done.
You may have missed the
I am waiting for the bug Issue5111 (httplib: wrong Host header when
connecting to IPv6 litteral URL) to be fixed for a very long.
Even I attached patches, test patches. How to get commit access so that I
can fix such issues ( HTTP lib )
- Chandrasekar
Hi everyone
[Sorry if this comes twice, connection errors here]
Raymond Hettinger noticed on the tracker that there are different
interpretations of the “accepted” resolution:
> Traditionally it denotes an approved patch, not a agreement that the
> bug is valid.
Daniel Stutzbach and I are (were
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
> (A note about PEP 8 compliance: Module names have been mostly fixed, but
> not all function/method names, for example in logging and unittest. If
> I recall correctly, readability did not seem to make all the rewrites
> worth it.)
Correct. W
Hello
[Sorry if this comes twice, connection errors here]
(A bit of context: The original message comes from bug #2775, “Implement
PEP 3108”, a meta-bug tracking stdlib reorganization for py3k.)
> I am very glad you're reorganizing the Standard Library. Thumbs up! I
> hope everything will comply
Hi Sridhar,
Le 15/10/2010 18:50, Sridhar Ratnakumar a écrit :
We definitely like to share our core Python patches for AIX 5.1/5.2 and other
platforms.
Great to hear that ActiveState shares their improvements for Python on
AIX! Thanks for the patch in git, I will check it and try to open some
23 matches
Mail list logo