On Oct 1, 2009, at 5:48 PM, Sridhar Ratnakumar wrote:
No new significant failures have been found. (Some trivial issues
have been reported in the bug tracker).
Fantastic, thanks. I'll be tagging the final release soon.
-Barry
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_
Scott Dial wrote:
> Allow me to be naive for a moment and say,
> is this not the point of rc1 but to catch bugs that should not be in the
> final?
For an x.y.0 rc I would usually agree with you, but for x.y.z (where z >
0), the intended situation is for there to be zero functional changes
between
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:06:47 -0700, Sridhar Ratnakumar
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:44:14 -0700, Barry Warsaw
wrote:
2.6.3rc1 builds fine on Linux x86/x86_64, MacOSX 10.4 ppc/x86, Windows
32bit/64bit, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris just like 2.6.2 did.
Thanks for the feedback! Did you run th
On Oct 1, 2009, at 1:47 PM, Scott Dial wrote:
Allow me to be naive for a moment and say,
is this not the point of rc1 but to catch bugs that should not be in
the
final?
Actually, no. The point of an rc is to avoid a brown paper bag
mistake, i.e. something we really fscked up in the relea
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Scott Dial wrote:
>> I would appreciate this bug being resolved before the next release as it
>> effects me on a daily basis. I have submitted a patch, which reflects my
>> local solution.
>
> Unfortunately, it's almost certainly too late to get this into 2.6.3. It
> really n
Scott Dial wrote:
> Scott Dial wrote:
> > While this code is present in
> > older versions of python, it seems to have become a problem recently
> > (2009-05-06 is the earliest report on the issue) perhaps due to a
> > version bump of OpenSSL? I never noticed the problem in python2.5 even
> > tho
On Oct 1, 2009, at 7:09 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Scott Dial wrote:
I would appreciate this bug being resolved before the next release
as it
effects me on a daily basis. I have submitted a patch, which
reflects my
local solution.
Unfortunately, it's almost certainly too late to get this int
Scott Dial wrote:
> I would appreciate this bug being resolved before the next release as it
> effects me on a daily basis. I have submitted a patch, which reflects my
> local solution.
Unfortunately, it's almost certainly too late to get this into 2.6.3. It
really needed to be brought up back whe
Scott Dial wrote:
> While this code is present in
> older versions of python, it seems to have become a problem recently
> (2009-05-06 is the earliest report on the issue) perhaps due to a
> version bump of OpenSSL? I never noticed the problem in python2.5 even
> though the code is unchanged.
To a
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> If not, I'll try to
> spend some time over the next few days looking at outstanding bugs, and
> marking release blockers, etc.
I'd like to draw attention to:
http://bugs.python.org/issue5949
Which is a regression of imaplib.py introduced in r57680.
Ever since I switched to
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:44:14 -0700, Barry Warsaw wrote:
2.6.3rc1 builds fine on Linux x86/x86_64, MacOSX 10.4 ppc/x86, Windows
32bit/64bit, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris just like 2.6.2 did.
Thanks for the feedback! Did you run the test suite on any of these?
I will run the tests sometime tonight
[Sridhar Ratnakumar]
2.6.3rc1 builds fine on Linux x86/x86_64, MacOSX 10.4 ppc/x86, Windows
32bit/64bit, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris just like 2.6.2 did.
Did the test suite pass too?
Raymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail
On Sep 30, 2009, at 3:36 PM, Sridhar Ratnakumar wrote:
2.6.3rc1 builds fine on Linux x86/x86_64, MacOSX 10.4 ppc/x86,
Windows 32bit/64bit, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris just like 2.6.2 did.
Thanks for the feedback! Did you run the test suite on any of these?
-Barry
PGP.sig
Description: This is
2.6.3rc1 builds fine on Linux x86/x86_64, MacOSX 10.4 ppc/x86, Windows
32bit/64bit, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris just like 2.6.2 did.
-srid
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 05:34:02 -0700, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:29 AM, Ned Deily wrote:
In my opinion, the standard python.org OS X installe
On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:29 AM, Ned Deily wrote:
In my opinion, the standard python.org OS X installer for 2.6.3 now
"works well" on 10.4, 10.5, and 10.6 and is ready for release.
Fantastic, thanks. Martin's uploaded the Windows binaries so I'll
make the announcement now. No commits to the 2
In article <9d506035-7c2d-4929-a134-e88eeb7b7...@python.org>,
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 9, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
> > The recent release of OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) has triggered a fair
> > amount of 2.6 bug tracker activity, since 10.6 now includes 2.6
> > (2.6.1)
> > and a 64-b
On Sep 25, 2009, at 4:18 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Barry - this is your call, but I think
http://bugs.python.org/issue6990 should be a rel blocker too.
Done.
-Barry
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Python-Dev mailing
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 19, 2009, at 2:51 PM, qwavel wrote:
>
>> What about this bug:
>> http://bugs.python.org/issue3890
>> It appears to me that the SSL module is broken in the 2.6.x line on all
>> platforms in one of its most common uses (non-blocking). It
On Sep 19, 2009, at 2:51 PM, qwavel wrote:
What about this bug:
http://bugs.python.org/issue3890
It appears to me that the SSL module is broken in the 2.6.x line on
all
platforms in one of its most common uses (non-blocking). It also
seems that
the problem and solution are well understood,
qwavel wrote:
> What about this bug:
> http://bugs.python.org/issue3890
> It appears to me that the SSL module is broken in the 2.6.x line on all
> platforms in one of its most common uses (non-blocking). It also seems that
> the problem and solution are well understood, so the solution would ma
Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> On Sep 15, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>> The IDLE issue is IMHO a release blocker, as is issue 6851.
>
> So that leaves 4 release blockers for 2.6.3.
>
What about this bug:
http://bugs.python.org/issue3890
It appears to me that the SSL module is broken
On 16 Sep, 2009, at 14:52, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Sep 15, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
The IDLE issue is IMHO a release blocker, as is issue 6851.
So that leaves 4 release blockers for 2.6.3. Three of these are
assigned to Ronald. Ronald are you sure you will have time to fi
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 05:52, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 15, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>> The IDLE issue is IMHO a release blocker, as is issue 6851.
>
> So that leaves 4 release blockers for 2.6.3. Three of these are assigned to
> Ronald. Ronald are you sure you will have ti
On Sep 15, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
The IDLE issue is IMHO a release blocker, as is issue 6851.
So that leaves 4 release blockers for 2.6.3. Three of these are
assigned to Ronald. Ronald are you sure you will have time to fix
these by then? The one I'm still uncertain on
On 10 Sep, 2009, at 18:23, Ned Deily wrote:
In article <9d506035-7c2d-4929-a134-e88eeb7b7...@python.org>,
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Sep 9, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
In article <11a6545d-7204-4f61-b55b-1cc77cb56...@python.org>,
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I still want to release by the 25th
On Sep 10, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Barry Warsaw schrieb:
I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer,
but for
various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd like
to
reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25-
September.
In article ,
Ronald Oussoren wrote:
> On 9 Sep, 2009, at 19:29, Ned Deily wrote:
> >
> >
> > Without trying to put Ronald on the spot (too much!), it would be a
> > good
> > idea to get his assessment where things stand wrt 2.6 on 10.6 before
> > setting a final release date.
>
> MacOS X 10.6
Barry Warsaw schrieb:
> I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer, but for
> various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd like to
> reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25-September.
I'm travelling that week (as well as the time until th
In article <9d506035-7c2d-4929-a134-e88eeb7b7...@python.org>,
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 9, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
>
> > In article <11a6545d-7204-4f61-b55b-1cc77cb56...@python.org>,
> > Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >> I still want to release by the 25th, but I'd be willing to move the
On Sep 9, 2009, at 2:19 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
MacOS X 10.6 support should be stable now, except for a critical issue
with IDLE: opening a new window hangs IDLE (issue 6864).
That said, I haven't scanned the issue tracker for more 10.6 related
issues.
I just opened issue 6877 and provid
On 9 Sep, 2009, at 19:29, Ned Deily wrote:
Without trying to put Ronald on the spot (too much!), it would be a
good
idea to get his assessment where things stand wrt 2.6 on 10.6 before
setting a final release date.
MacOS X 10.6 support should be stable now, except for a critical issue
wit
On Sep 9, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
In article <11a6545d-7204-4f61-b55b-1cc77cb56...@python.org>,
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I still want to release by the 25th, but I'd be willing to move the
rc
to Monday the 21st. We're really just trying to avoid a brown bag
moment, so that should give
In article <11a6545d-7204-4f61-b55b-1cc77cb56...@python.org>,
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I still want to release by the 25th, but I'd be willing to move the rc
> to Monday the 21st. We're really just trying to avoid a brown bag
> moment, so that should give us enough time to double check the rele
On Sep 9, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer,
but for
various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd like
to
reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25-
September.
We s
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer, but for
> various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd like to
> reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25-September.
>
> We should probably do a release candidate, so I'd li
I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer, but
for various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd
like to reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25-
September.
We should probably do a release candidate, so I'd like to make that on
23
36 matches
Mail list logo
