Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Tuesday 17 October 2006 19:09, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > But I'm certainly thinking if there's a 2.3.6, it's going to be 2.3.5 > > with the email fix and the unicode repr() fix, and that's it. > > sounds good to me. how much work would that be, and if you're willing to > coordinate, is there any

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Anthony Baxter wrote: > > why not just do a "2.3.5+security" source release, and leave the rest to > > the downstream maintainers? > > I think we'd need to renumber it to 2.3.6 at least, otherwise there's the > problem of distinguishing between the two. I'd _hope_ that all the > downstreams will h

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Steve Holden wrote: > Or you can start to promote Django again ... my original plan would still work, I think: http://effbot.org/zone/pydotorg-cache.htm#todo ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/lis

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Tuesday 17 October 2006 18:54, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > Martin v. L�wis wrote: > > In 2.3.6, there wouldn't just be that change, but also a few other > > changes that have been collected, some relevant for Windows as well > > why not just do a "2.3.5+security" source release, and leave the rest to

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Martin v. Löwis wrote: > In 2.3.6, there wouldn't just be that change, but also a few other > changes that have been collected, some relevant for Windows as well why not just do a "2.3.5+security" source release, and leave the rest to the downstream maintainers?

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Anthony Baxter schrieb: > Subsequent release. This is still largely a manual process - I search for all > the references to the previous release, update them, then read through it for > missed bits. I then update the text bits that need to be changed. There's all > sorts of minor variations ther

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Sunday 15 October 2006 21:23, Steve Holden wrote: > Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > Steve Holden schrieb: > The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do > local work on a bunch of different files > >>> > >>>the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Steve Holden schrieb: > The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do local work on a bunch of different files >>> >>>the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to edit a >>>bunch of different files to make a new release. >>

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Josiah Carlson schrieb: > I've got a build setup for 2.3.x, but I lack the Wise Installer. It may > be possible to use the 2.4 or 2.5 .msi creation tools, if that was > sufficient. I don't think that would be appropriate. There are differences in usage which might be significant to some users, e.

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Tim Peters schrieb: > FYI, I still have the Wise Installer. But since my understanding is > that the "Unicode buffer overrun" thingie is a non-issue on Windows, > I've got no interest in wrestling with a 2.3.6 for Windows. In 2.3.6, there wouldn't just be that change, but also a few other changes

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

[Thomas Heller] >> Yes. But I've switched machines since I last build an installer, and I do not >> have all of the needed software installed any longer, for example the Wise >> Installer. [Martin v. Löwis] > Ok. So we are technically incapable of producing the Windows binaries of > another 2.3.

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thomas Heller schrieb: > > Yes. But I've switched machines since I last build an installer, and I do > > not > > have all of the needed software installed any longer, for example the Wise > > Installer. > > Ok. So we are technically incapable o

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Thomas Heller schrieb: > Yes. But I've switched machines since I last build an installer, and I do not > have all of the needed software installed any longer, for example the Wise > Installer. Ok. So we are technically incapable of producing the Windows binaries of another 2.3.x release, then?

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Steve Holden schrieb: >>> The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do local >>> work on a bunch of different files >> >> the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to edit a >> bunch of different files to make a new release. >> > Indeed. I seem to remember

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Fredrik Lundh wrote: > Brett Cannon wrote: > > >>I know AMK was experimenting with rest2web as a possible way to do the >>web site. There has also been talk about trying out another system. >>But I also know some people would rather put the effort into improving >>Pyramid. > > > You forgot

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Fredrik Lundh wrote: > Anthony Baxter wrote: > > >>The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do local >>work on a bunch of different files > > > the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to edit a > bunch of different files to make a new release. > In

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday, October 13, 2006, at 12:36PM, Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >To be fair, (thanks to Ronald) the Mac build is entirely automated by >a script with the caveat that you should be a little careful about >what your environment looks like (e.g. don't install fink or macports, >o

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday, October 13, 2006, at 01:10PM, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Friday 13 October 2006 20:35, Bob Ippolito wrote: >> With most consumer connections it's a lot faster to download than to >> upload. Perhaps it would save you a few minutes if the contributors >> uploaded dir

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Martin v. Löwis schrieb: > Anthony Baxter schrieb: >> Mostly it is easy for me, with the one huge caveat. As far as I know, the >> Mac >> build is a single command to run for Ronald, and the Doc build similarly for >> Fred. I don't know what Martin has to do for the Windows build. > > Actually,

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday 13 October 2006 20:35, Bob Ippolito wrote: > With most consumer connections it's a lot faster to download than to > upload. Perhaps it would save you a few minutes if the contributors > uploaded directly to the destination (or to some other fast server) > and you could download and sign i

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Anthony: >> Sure - I get that. There's a couple of reasons for me doing it. First is gpg >> signing the release files, which has to happen on my local machine. There's >> also the variation in who actually builds the releases; at least one of the >> Mac builds was done by Bob I. But there could be

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On 10/13/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 13 October 2006 16:59, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > yeah, but *you* are doing it. if the server did that, Martin and > > other trusted contributors could upload the files as soon as they're > > available, instead of first transferring

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday 13 October 2006 16:59, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > yeah, but *you* are doing it. if the server did that, Martin and > other trusted contributors could upload the files as soon as they're > available, instead of first transferring them to you, and then waiting > for you to find yet another pre

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Anthony Baxter wrote: >> For reference, here's my effbot.org release procedure: >> >> 1) upload the distribution files one by one, as soon as they're >> available. all links and stuff will appear automatically >> >> 2) update the associated description text through the web, when >> necessary, as

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

> For reference, here's my effbot.org release procedure: > > 1) upload the distribution files one by one, as soon as they're > available. all links and stuff will appear automatically > > 2) update the associated description text through the web, when > necessary, as an HTML fragment. click "sav

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Anthony Baxter wrote: > The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do local > work on a bunch of different files the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to edit a bunch of different files to make a new release. ___

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Brett Cannon wrote: > I know AMK was experimenting with rest2web as a possible way to do the > web site. There has also been talk about trying out another system. > But I also know some people would rather put the effort into improving > Pyramid. You forgot the ponies! > Once again, it's a

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

"Gregory P. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > as for buildbot, i haven't looked at its design but from the chatter > i've seen i was under the impression that it operates on a continually > updated sandbox rather than a 100% fresh checkout for each build? It's a configuration option. If you us

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday 13 October 2006 12:56, Steve Holden wrote: > The real problem is the more or less complete lack of incremental > rebuild, which does make site generation time-consuming. That's _part_ of it. There's other issues. For instance, there's probably 4 places where the "list of releases" is st

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Michael Foord wrote: > Brett Cannon wrote: > >>On 10/12/06, *Anthony Baxter* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> wrote: >> >>On Friday 13 October 2006 05:30, Georg Brandl wrote: >>> I'm I the only one who feels that the website is a big workflow >>problem? >> >>Assumi

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday 13 October 2006 07:34, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > i'm not volunteering to setup an automated system for this but i've > > got good ideas how to do it if i ever find time or someone wants to > > chat offline. :( > > I wish I had the cycles to volunteer to help out implementing this. :( Well,

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Brett Cannon wrote: > On 10/12/06, *Anthony Baxter* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > On Friday 13 October 2006 05:30, Georg Brandl wrote: > > I'm I the only one who feels that the website is a big workflow > problem? > > Assuming you meant "Am I", then I

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On 10/12/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Friday 13 October 2006 05:30, Georg Brandl wrote:> I'm I the only one who feels that the website is a big workflow problem?Assuming you meant "Am I", then I absolutely agree with you. I have touched the web site since the Pyramid switch and

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Oct 12, 2006, at 5:07 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Of course, that makes the idea die here and now. Without volunteers > to do the actual work, it just won't happen. True, and there's no carrot/stick of a salary to entice people into doing what

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Oct 12, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote: > IMHO thats a backwards view; I'm with Barry. Requiring human > intervention to do anything other than press the big green "go" button > to launch the "official" release build process is an opport

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday 13 October 2006 05:30, Georg Brandl wrote: > I'm I the only one who feels that the website is a big workflow problem? Assuming you meant "Am I", then I absolutely agree with you. -- Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It's never too late to have a happy childhood. __

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Gregory P. Smith schrieb: > three macs with some virtual machines could take care of this (damn > apple for not allowing their stupid OS to be virtualized). that said, > i'm not volunteering to setup an automated system for this but i've > got good ideas how to do it if i ever find time or someone

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 09:30:49PM +0200, Georg Brandl wrote: > Barry Warsaw wrote: > > I've offered in the past to dust off my release manager cap and do a > > 2.3.6 release. Having not done one in a long while, the most > > daunting part for me is getting the website updated, since I have

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 06:43:40AM +1000, Anthony Baxter wrote: > On Friday 13 October 2006 06:25, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > On Oct 12, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote: > > > Mostly it is easy for me, with the one huge caveat. As far as I > > > know, the Mac > > > build is a single command to

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Fredrik Lundh schrieb: > ideally, releasing (earlier release + well-defined patch set) should be > fairly trivial, compared to releasing (new release from trunk). what do > we have to do to make it easier to handle that case? For the Windows release, I doubt there is much one can do. The time-con

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Barry Warsaw wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Oct 12, 2006, at 4:08 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote: > >> I've had a couple of queries about whether PSF-2006-001 merits a >> 2.3.6. >> Personally, I lean towards "no" - 2.4 was nearly two years ago now. >> But I'm >> ope

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Anthony Baxter schrieb: > Mostly it is easy for me, with the one huge caveat. As far as I know, the Mac > build is a single command to run for Ronald, and the Doc build similarly for > Fred. I don't know what Martin has to do for the Windows build. Actually, for 2.3.x, I wouldn't do the Windows

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Barry Warsaw schrieb: > Why can't we get buildbot to do most or all of this? Very easy. Because somebody has to set it up. I estimate a man month or so before it works. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.pytho

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Friday 13 October 2006 06:25, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Oct 12, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote: > > Mostly it is easy for me, with the one huge caveat. As far as I > > know, the Mac > > build is a single command to run for Ronald, and the Doc build > > similarly for > > Fred. I don't know

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Oct 12, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Oct 12, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote: Mostly it is easy for me, with the one huge caveat. As far as I know, the Mac build is a single command to run for Ronald, and the Doc build simi

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Oct 12, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote: > Mostly it is easy for me, with the one huge caveat. As far as I > know, the Mac > build is a single command to run for Ronald, and the Doc build > similarly for > Fred. I don't know what Martin

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Thursday 12 October 2006 18:18, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > Anthony Baxter wrote: > > 16 releases in 12 months would just about make me go crazy. > > is there any way we could further automate or otherwise streamline or > distribute the release process ? It's already pretty heavily automated (see we

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Oct 12, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > Perhaps all that is needed from both a practical and public relations > viewpoint is the release of a 2.3.5U4 security patch as a separate > file > listed just after 2.3.5 on the source downloads pag

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

"Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > I've offered in the past to dust off my release manager cap and do a > 2.3.6 release. Having not done one in a long while, the most > daunting part for me is getting the website upda

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Oct 12, 2006, at 4:08 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote: > I've had a couple of queries about whether PSF-2006-001 merits a > 2.3.6. > Personally, I lean towards "no" - 2.4 was nearly two years ago now. > But I'm > open to other opinions - I guess peopl

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 06:08:46PM +1000, Anthony Baxter wrote: > I've had a couple of queries about whether PSF-2006-001 merits a 2.3.6. > Personally, I lean towards "no" - 2.4 was nearly two years ago now. But I'm > open to other opinions - I guess people see the phrase "buffer overrun" and >

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

Anthony Baxter wrote: > 16 releases in 12 months would just about make me go crazy. is there any way we could further automate or otherwise streamline or distribute the release process ? ideally, releasing (earlier release + well-defined patch set) should be fairly trivial, compared to releasing

[Python-Dev] 2.3.6 for the unicode buffer overrun

I've had a couple of queries about whether PSF-2006-001 merits a 2.3.6. Personally, I lean towards "no" - 2.4 was nearly two years ago now. But I'm open to other opinions - I guess people see the phrase "buffer overrun" and they get scared. Plus once 2.4.4 final is out next week, I'll have cut