Thanks all!
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 15, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>>>
Here's another one barry:
http://bugs.python.
On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Barry Warsaw
wrote:
On Oct 15, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Here's another one barry:
http://bugs.python.org/issue7120
We should get this in - it's a regression I introduced awhile ago
for
envir
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>
>> Here's another one barry:
>>
>> http://bugs.python.org/issue7120
>>
>> We should get this in - it's a regression I introduced awhile ago for
>> environments without the multiprocessing modu
On Oct 15, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Here's another one barry:
http://bugs.python.org/issue7120
We should get this in - it's a regression I introduced awhile ago for
environments without the multiprocessing module using logging.
Was this a regression in 2.6.2 or 2.6.3? I think i
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 7, 2009, at 1:26 PM, Scott Dial wrote:
>
>> I suspect this release is primarily to quench the problems with
>> distutils, but..
>>
>> http://bugs.python.org/issue5949
>>
>> doesn't seem to have been addressed by you. And this seems like
On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:31 AM, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
Excellent. That's exactly what I meant.
I quoted the part of the previous message where you proposed to
review another patch for 2.6.5. I guess it was not very clear that
I'm proposing to review this for 2.6.5 as well. Well, at least
On Oct 13, 2009, at 8:23 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 8, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I want us to be very careful about 2.6.4. This isn't a normal bug
fix release, it's specifically there to remove the brown paper bag
of 2.6.
On Oct 8, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I want us to be very careful about 2.6.4. This isn't a normal bug
fix release, it's specifically there to remove the brown paper bag
of 2.6.3 from our heads. So let's be conservative and fix
On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I want us to be very careful about 2.6.4. This isn't a normal bug
fix release, it's specifically there to remove the brown paper bag
of 2.6.3 from our heads. So let's be conservative and fix this one
in 2.6.5.
Can we get the readline patch
On 7 Oct, 2009, at 23:09, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 7, 2009, at 3:46 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:42, Ronald Oussoren
wrote:
On 7 Oct, 2009, at 20:53, Brett Cannon wrote:
I just tried building out of svn and a ton of tests that rely on
urllib failed because the
I just tried building out of svn and a ton of tests that rely on urllib
failed because the _scproxy module wasn't built and it unconditionally
imports it under darwin. Turns out that it requires the Mac toolbox glue to
be built which I always skip since I don't care about it.
I am fairly certain th
On Oct 7, 2009, at 3:46 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:42, Ronald Oussoren
wrote:
On 7 Oct, 2009, at 20:53, Brett Cannon wrote:
I just tried building out of svn and a ton of tests that rely on
urllib failed because the _scproxy module wasn't built and it
unconditio
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:42, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 7 Oct, 2009, at 20:53, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> I just tried building out of svn and a ton of tests that rely on urllib
> failed because the _scproxy module wasn't built and it unconditionally
> imports it under darwin. Turns out that it r
On 7 Oct, 2009, at 20:53, Brett Cannon wrote:I just tried building out of svn and a ton of tests that rely on urllib failed because the _scproxy module wasn't built and it unconditionally imports it under darwin. Turns out that it requires the Mac toolbox glue to be built which I always skip since
On Oct 7, 2009, at 1:26 PM, Scott Dial wrote:
I suspect this release is primarily to quench the problems with
distutils, but..
http://bugs.python.org/issue5949
doesn't seem to have been addressed by you. And this seems like it
would
be another unfortunate loss of an opportunity.
I want us
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> 2.6.4 final is planned for 18-October.
Barry,
I suspect this release is primarily to quench the problems with
distutils, but..
http://bugs.python.org/issue5949
doesn't seem to have been addressed by you. And this seems like it would
be another unfortunate loss of an opport
Hello everyone.
The source tarballs and Windows installers for Python 2.6.4rc1 are now
available:
http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.6.4/
Please download them, install them, and try to use them with your
projects and environments. Let us know if you encounter any problems
with th
17 matches
Mail list logo
