Re: [Python-Dev] Not releasing rc1 tonight

Barry writes: > In addition, Mark reported in IRC that there are some regressions in > the logging module. 3772 logging module fails with non-ascii data Which according to the IRC discussion doesn't apply to py3k. The fix for 2.6 is quite trivial... Cheers, Mark _

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Not releasing rc1 tonight

Barry> In addition, Mark reported in IRC that there are some regressions Barry> in the logging module. Vinay apparently checked in some changes to the logging module with no review. In the absence of obvious bug fixes there that should probably be reverted. Skip

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

>> Related but tangential question that we were discussing on the >> pygr[0] mailing list -- what is the "official" word on a scalable >> object store in Python? We've been using bsddb, but is there an >> alternative? And what if bsddb is removed? Brett> Beyond shelve there

Re: [Python-Dev] [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0

Michele> I do not use bsddb directly, but I use shelve which on Linux Michele> usually takes advantage of bsddb. Does removing bsddb mean that Michele> I will not be able to read shelve files written with Python 2.5 Michele> with Python 3.0? That would be quite disturbing to me. C

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Not releasing rc1 tonight

2008/9/4 Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Can I go ahead with some bug fixes and doc improvements > or should I wait until after Friday? Doc improvements: go ahead. Bug fixes: the patchs should be revised by other developer. (I'll be hanging around in #python-dev today and tomorrow, btw

Re: [Python-Dev] C API for gc.enable() and gc.disable()

Hello, Andrey Zhmoginov wrote: > I don't know if the following question is relevant, but it seems that many > people here are familiar with Python cyclic garbage collector. > I see Python [v2.5.2 (r252:60911, Jul 31 2008, 17:28:52)] crashing with > Segment fault when I extend Python with a very si

Re: [Python-Dev] Not releasing rc1 tonight

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:14 AM, Raymond Hettinger wrote: [Barry] I'm not going to release rc1 tonight. Can I go ahead with some bug fixes and doc improvements or should I wait until after Friday? Doc fixes are fine. Please have bug fix patches re

Re: [Python-Dev] Not releasing rc1 tonight

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sep 4, 2008, at 3:28 AM, Mark Hammond wrote: Barry writes: In addition, Mark reported in IRC that there are some regressions in the logging module. 3772 logging module fails with non-ascii data Which according to the IRC discussion doesn't a

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Not releasing rc1 tonight

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sep 4, 2008, at 7:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barry> In addition, Mark reported in IRC that there are some regressions Barry> in the logging module. Vinay apparently checked in some changes to the logging module with no review. In

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Not releasing rc1 tonight

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sep 4, 2008, at 7:31 AM, Facundo Batista wrote: (I'll be hanging around in #python-dev today and tomorrow, btw, ping me if I can help you) Me too, though I'm a bit busy at work. Ping my nick 'barry' if you need any RM-level decision. - -Ba

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brett Cannon wrote: >> Related but tangential question that we were discussing on the pygr[0] >> mailing list -- what is the "official" word on a scalable object store >> in Python? We've been using bsddb, but is there an alternative? And >> what if

Re: [Python-Dev] [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Michele Simionato wrote: > I do not use bsddb directly, but I use shelve which on Linux usually > takes advantage of bsddb. Does removing bsddb mean that > I will not be able to read shelve files written with Python 2.5 > with Python 3.0? That would be

Re: [Python-Dev] [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brett Cannon wrote: >> Also, the reason for removal may yet disappear >> if jcrea steps in an continues to make updates. > > OK, but none of his changes have received a code review, so if we are > going to go down the whole "disciplined" route about i

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Not releasing rc1 tonight

Barry> Or did he commit Mark's patch from bug 3772? If so, that would Barry> count as a reviewed patch. The checkin message says issue 3726: Author: vinay.sajip Date: Wed Sep 3 11:20:05 2008 New Revision: 66180 Log: Issue #3726: Allowed spaces in separators in logg

Re: [Python-Dev] [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0

Raymond Hettinger wrote: > I think this should be deferred to Py3.1. > This decision was not widely discussed and I think it likely that some > users will > be surprised and dismayed. The release > candidate seems to be the wrong time to > yank this out (in part because of the surprise > factor) a

Re: [Python-Dev] HTTPS read-only SVN access is denied?

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:08 AM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> And why not to setup HTTPS for anonymous read and authorized write >> access? It is not that hard to do and will solve many problems with >> proxies. > > Because it requires setting up a certificate. Certificate is alrea

Re: [Python-Dev] HTTPS read-only SVN access is denied?

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:48 AM, Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I do not need the whole branch - only a small subset of files related >> to distutils. I know that bazaar can't do partial checkouts - it can >> only fetch the whole branch. What about mercurial? > > Mercurial can't do

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 03:23:22PM +0200, Jesus Cea wrote: -> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- -> Hash: SHA1 -> -> Brett Cannon wrote: -> >> Related but tangential question that we were discussing on the pygr[0] -> >> mailing list -- what is the "official" word on a scalable object store -> >> i

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

At 6:10 AM -0500 9/4/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> Related but tangential question that we were discussing on the >>> pygr[0] mailing list -- what is the "official" word on a scalable >>> object store in Python? We've been using bsddb, but is there an >>> alternative? And what

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 03:23:22PM +0200, Jesus Cea wrote: > Compared to sqlite, you don't need to know SQL, you can finetuning (for > example, using ACI instead of ACID, deciding store by store), and you > can do replication and distributed transactions (useful, for example, if > your storage is b

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 10:29:10AM -0400, Tony Nelson wrote: -> At 6:10 AM -0500 9/4/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -> >>> Related but tangential question that we were discussing on the -> >>> pygr[0] mailing list -- what is the "official" word on a scalable -> >>> object store in Python?

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Not releasing rc1 tonight

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sep 4, 2008, at 9:45 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barry> Or did he commit Mark's patch from bug 3772? If so, that would Barry> count as a reviewed patch. The checkin message says issue 3726: Author: vinay.sajip Date: Wed Sep 3

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

At 7:37 AM -0700 9/4/08, C. Titus Brown wrote: >On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 10:29:10AM -0400, Tony Nelson wrote: ... >-> Shipping an application to end users is a different problem. Such packages >-> should include a private copy of Python as well as of any dependent >-> libraries, as tested. > >Why?

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecatebsddb for removal in 3.0)

[C. Titus Brown] I'm happy to be told that bsddb is too much of a maintenance burden for Python 2.6/3.0 to have -- especially since it's gone from 3.0 now ;) -- but I don't think the arguments that *it won't matter that it's not there* have been very credible. Not credible, not widely discuss

Re: [Python-Dev] HTTPS read-only SVN access is denied?

Hello, 2008/9/4 techtonik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:48 AM, Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> I do not need the whole branch - only a small subset of files related >>> to distutils. I know that bazaar can't do partial checkouts - it can >>> only fetch the whole

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:01:35AM -0400, Tony Nelson wrote: -> At 7:37 AM -0700 9/4/08, C. Titus Brown wrote: -> >On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 10:29:10AM -0400, Tony Nelson wrote: -> ... -> >-> Shipping an application to end users is a different problem. Such packages -> >-> should include a private

Re: [Python-Dev] [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Nick Coghlan wrote: > While that will still be visible to some degree due to the presence of > the 2.x version of the bsddb code in Python 2.6, I don't think it will > be quite the same as it would have been with the 3.x version also being > readily av

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

> I don't think the convenience of "batteries *included*" should be > underestimated. Yeah, but bsddb is one of those exploding batteries. I've used it for years, and have had lots and lots of problems with it. Having SQLite in there is great; now we need implementations of anydbm and shelve whi

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

> I have to say I've never had problems with a stock install of Python on > either Mac OS X or Windows (shockingly enough :). I think this is good I agree. I just use the stock Python on OS X and Windows. And it seems to work well for my rather large and complicated (PIL, PyLucene, Medusa, Repo

Re: [Python-Dev] Durus memory

I'm sorry this post is a bit off-topic, but I think I should correct this. On Sep 4, 2008, at 11:54 AM, Oleg wrote: Durus (and ZODB) has an index of all objects, the index is stored in memory AFAIK - a real problem if one has millions of objects. Durus now has an option to store the index

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 C. Titus Brown wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 03:23:22PM +0200, Jesus Cea wrote: > -> Brett Cannon wrote: > -> >> Related but tangential question that we were discussing on the pygr[0] > -> >> mailing list -- what is the "official" word on a scalable

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

> Compared to sqlite, you don't need to know SQL, you can finetuning > (for example, using ACI instead of ACID, deciding store by store), and > you can do replication and distributed transactions (useful, for > example, if your storage is bigger than a single machine capacity,

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

Doesn't SQLlite still have a 4gb cap? I'd personally prefer an open source solution (if that's Berkeley so be it but there's plenty out there... MySQL for one) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pyth

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

never mind about the limit... I was thinking SQL Express On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Jeff Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Doesn't SQLlite still have a 4gb cap? > > I'd personally prefer an open source solution (if that's Berkeley so be it > but there's plenty out there... MySQL for one) > >

Re: [Python-Dev] SQLite (was: bsddb alternative)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 01:07:23PM -0400, Jeff Hall wrote: > Doesn't SQLlite still have a 4gb cap? http://sqlite.org/limits.html Oleg. -- Oleg Broytmannhttp://phd.pp.ru/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN. ___

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Oleg Broytmann wrote: > -- SQLite is public domain; the licensing terms of Berkeley DB[1] are not >friendly to commercial applications: "Our open source license ... >permits use of Berkeley DB in open source projects or in applications >tha

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 07:40:28PM +0200, Jesus Cea wrote: > A stable fileformat is useful for long term support, but an evolving > format allows improvements. Once I upgraded Python on a Windows computer... I think it was 2.2 to 2.3 upgrade - and all my bsddb databases stopped working. I canno

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 09:25:43AM -0700, Bill Janssen wrote: > Yeah, but bsddb is one of those exploding batteries. I've used it for > years, and have had lots and lots of problems with it. Having SQLite > in there is great; now we need implementations of anydbm and shelve > which use it. What

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 07:01:47PM +0200, Jesus Cea wrote: -> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- -> Hash: SHA1 -> -> C. Titus Brown wrote: -> > Since I/we want to distribute pygr to end-users, this is really not a -> > pleasant prospect. Also often the installation of Python itself goes -> > much

Re: [Python-Dev] [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 6:35 AM, Jesus Cea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Brett Cannon wrote: >>> Also, the reason for removal may yet disappear >>> if jcrea steps in an continues to make updates. >> >> OK, but none of his changes have received a cod

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > SQLite is public domain; the licensing terms of Berkeley DB[1] are not > friendly to commercial applications: "Our open source license ... > permits use of Berkeley DB in open source projects or in applications > that are

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:03 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Compared to sqlite, you don't need to know SQL, you can finetuning >> (for example, using ACI instead of ACID, deciding store by store), and >> you can do replication and distributed transactions (useful, for >> examp

[Python-Dev] 3rd-party dbms

Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > for 3.1 there is nothing saying we can't change shelve and the > dbm package to allow 3rd-party code to register with the dbm package > such that bsddb can be used as needed behind the scenes. Many years ago I wrote toy hashes based on ZODB and MetaKit.

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Oleg Broytmann wrote: >Once I upgraded Python on a Windows computer... I think it was 2.2 to > 2.3 upgrade - and all my bsddb databases stopped working. I cannot call > this "improvement". I didn't have db_upgarde on that computer (or I didn't > kn

Re: [Python-Dev] 3rd-party dbms

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> for 3.1 there is nothing saying we can't change shelve and the >> dbm package to allow 3rd-party code to register with the dbm package >> such that bsddb can be used as needed beh

Re: [Python-Dev] HTTPS read-only SVN access is denied?

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > > Did you try to open your browser to (for example) > http://svn.python.org/projects/python/trunk/Lib/distutils/ > and download the desired files from there? Yes, but it's a waste of time. It is SVN that should be fixed

[Python-Dev] patch for Cookie.py to add support for HttpOnly

Eighteen months ago, Arvin Schnell contributed a really straightforward three-line patch to Cookie.py adding support for the HttpOnly flag on cookies: http://bugs.python.org/issue1638033 In the last eighteen months, HttpOnly has become a de-facto extension to the cookie standard. It is now suppor

Re: [Python-Dev] Not releasing rc1 tonight

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > I'm not going to release rc1 tonight. There are too many open release > blockers that I don't want to defer, and I'd like the buildbots to churn > through the bsddb removal

Re: [Python-Dev] patch for Cookie.py to add support for HttpOnly

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Matt Chisholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eighteen months ago, Arvin Schnell contributed a really > straightforward three-line patch to Cookie.py adding support for the > HttpOnly flag on cookies: > > http://bugs.python.org/issue1638033 > > In the last eighteen mont

[Python-Dev] 'warnings' module changes still breaking Twisted, still looking for a fix

With the 2.6 final release impending, the Twisted community buildbot is still red, , but there only seems to be one real issue: the warn_explicit change. This seems like it could be a pretty minor bit of maintenance to clear up on our end, if Python provided the appropri

Re: [Python-Dev] 'warnings' module changes still breaking Twisted, still looking for a fix

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 5:11 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > With the 2.6 final release impending, the Twisted community buildbot is > still red, , but there only seems to be one real issue: > the warn_explicit change. This seems like it could be a pretty minor bit of > mai

Re: [Python-Dev] 'warnings' module changes still breaking Twisted, still looking for a fix

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 3:11 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > With the 2.6 final release impending, the Twisted community buildbot is > still red, , but there only seems to be one real issue: > the warn_explicit change. This seems like it could be a pretty minor bit of > mai

Re: [Python-Dev] 'warnings' module changes still breaking Twisted, still looking for a fix

On 10:18 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's why catch_warning keeps track of the warnings filter too, so you can call warnings.simplefilter("always") within the context manager and the filter state will be restored. Thanks for the pointer - this is interesting. I misunderstood the way the wa

Re: [Python-Dev] 'warnings' module changes still breaking Twisted, still looking for a fix

On 10:35 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not hard to force an import of warnings to use the pure Python version and totally ignore the C implementation. See test_warnings on how to pull that off. Then you can do your hack of overriding warn_explicit(). Benjamin Peterson's recommendation sou

Re: [Python-Dev] 'warnings' module changes still breaking Twisted, still looking for a fix

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 3:39 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10:18 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> That's why catch_warning keeps track of the warnings filter too, so >> you can call warnings.simplefilter("always") within the context >> manager and the filter state will be restored. > > Than

[Python-Dev] Can/should built-in functions get __get__?

One of the nice features of 3.0 is that differences between classes defined in C and Python (other than speed) are mostly erased or hidden from the view of a Python programmer. However, there are still sometimes surprising and quite visible differences between 'functions' written in C and Pyth

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

me> I suggested in another message (perhaps on another thread) that me> maybe a dbm.sqlite module would be worth having. http://bugs.python.org/issue3783 Skip ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/list

Re: [Python-Dev] Can/should built-in functions get __get__?

Terry Reedy wrote: One of the nice features of 3.0 is that differences between classes defined in C and Python (other than speed) are mostly erased or hidden from the view of a Python programmer. However, there are still sometimes surprising and quite visible differences between 'functions' w

Re: [Python-Dev] Not releasing rc1 tonight

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > I'm not going to release rc1 tonight. There are too many open release > blockers that I don't want to defer, and I'd like the buildbots to churn > through the bsddb removal

Re: [Python-Dev] bsddb alternative (was Re: [issue3769] Deprecate bsddb for removal in 3.0)

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 5:02 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >me> I suggested in another message (perhaps on another thread) that >me> maybe a dbm.sqlite module would be worth having. > > http://bugs.python.org/issue3783 I did a similar thing today. I can post my version later today. -

Re: [Python-Dev] Can/should built-in functions get __get__?

Christian Heimes wrote: Terry Reedy wrote: One of the nice features of 3.0 is that differences between classes defined in C and Python (other than speed) are mostly erased or hidden from the view of a Python programmer. However, there are still sometimes surprising and quite visible differ