18.12.13 04:40, Benjamin Peterson написав(ла):
Mostly yes, but at least you could tell people to upgrade straight to
2.7.7 and skip 2.7.6.
It'll make the people to postpone the upgrade to 2.7.6 (which fixes many
security bugs) until 2.7.7 release, instead of correcting their
morally-broken
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote:
18.12.13 04:40, Benjamin Peterson написав(ла):
Mostly yes, but at least you could tell people to upgrade straight to
2.7.7 and skip 2.7.6.
It'll make the people to postpone the upgrade to 2.7.6 (which fixes many
On 18 December 2013 20:17, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote:
18.12.13 04:40, Benjamin Peterson написав(ла):
Mostly yes, but at least you could tell people to upgrade straight to
2.7.7 and skip 2.7.6.
It'll
BTW, I bet a lavish dinner at PyCon that it is *only* Zope/ZODB that
does this. In the time we added this bogus dependency on undocumented
parameters, the PythonLabs team was at Zope and we didn't always get
our boundaries straight.
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:51 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com
But who could forget njzrs' wasp UAV software line 107, using
int=float?
https://github.com/nzjrs/wasp/blob/master/sw/groundstation/wasp/__init__.py#L107
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
BTW, I bet a lavish dinner at PyCon that it is *only* Zope/ZODB
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 11:31:47 -0500
Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
But who could forget njzrs' wasp UAV software line 107, using
int=float?
https://github.com/nzjrs/wasp/blob/master/sw/groundstation/wasp/__init__.py#L107
And the purpose is quite Pythonesque:
Generates a noisy
[Daniel Holth]
But who could forget njzrs' wasp UAV software line 107, using
int=float?
https://github.com/nzjrs/wasp/blob/master/sw/groundstation/wasp/__init__.py#L107
I could forget it ;-) The remarkable thing about the two instances of:
random.randrange(0.0,1.0, int=float)
in that
On Dec 18, 2013 11:54 AM, Tim Peters tim.pet...@gmail.com wrote:
[Daniel Holth]
But who could forget njzrs' wasp UAV software line 107, using
int=float?
https://github.com/nzjrs/wasp/blob/master/sw/groundstation/wasp/__init__.py#L107
I could forget it ;-) The remarkable thing about the
On 12/18/2013 08:54 AM, Tim Peters wrote:
Which reminds me. I used to think there was no such thing as a stupid
question. Then I discovered Stack Overflow ;-)
+1 QOTW
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/17/2013 01:40 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
This really seems a case of ZODB depending on internals where it
really, really should have known better. Calling this a de-facto
public interface seems way too far a stretch of the intention. And
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Dec 17, 2013, at 01:18 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8
Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in
a late-in-the-release-cycle third dot release? It caused, ZODB's tests
to
This really seems a case of ZODB depending on internals where it
really, really should have known better. Calling this a de-facto
public interface seems way too far a stretch of the intention. And
please don't fix it by version-testing and using a different argument
name...
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013
[Barry]
...
I don't think the API *has* to change in a backward incompatible way either.
The methods could be given **kws with a bit of hackery to figure out whether
the old API was being used (keys: int, default, maxwidth) or the new API was
being used (keys: _int and _maxwidth). Yeah it's
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:18:25 -0500
Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8
Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in
a late-in-the-release-cycle third dot
2013/12/17 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net:
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:18:25 -0500
Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8
Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in
Isn't changing it in 2.7.6 which is already released and then reverting in
2.7.7 worse? Either way 2.7.6 will have this change and be in the wild and
broken for people who depend on it
On Dec 17, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org wrote:
2013/12/17 Antoine Pitrou
Mostly yes, but at least you could tell people to upgrade straight to
2.7.7 and skip 2.7.6.
2013/12/17 Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io:
Isn't changing it in 2.7.6 which is already released and then reverting in
2.7.7 worse? Either way 2.7.6 will have this change and be in the wild and
broken
17 matches
Mail list logo
