[Python-3000] Py3k release schedule worries

[Brett Cannon]

On 12/19/06, Adam Olsen <rhamph at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/18/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > character, but AFAICT it fizzled; nobody has proposed to help with
> > getting the int unification branch, which is mostly done but still has
> > 22 failing tests last time I looked. I've received a few contributions
>
> > I'd also like to see people volunteer to help with the implementation
> > of some of these projects, and with the implementation of projects
> > that already have a PEP or don't need one. For example:
> >
> > - finishing the int unification branch
>
> Who should I conspire with to get this done?


Martin v. Loewis did all of the initial work on the int unification branch.
He would be the best person to directly talk with.  I am pretty sure he
reads this mailing list regularly.

  I've already tracked
> down one of the bugs: convert_to_double in floatobject.c prefers
> PyInt_AS_LONG, assuming it can't fail, which is no longer true.
>
> >>> 5.0 * 9999999999999
> -5.0
> >>> 1.0 + 999999999999
> 0.0
>
> What is the policy on working on the p3yk branch?


It's considered just like any other branch in Python.

  I thought I read
> that we should skip bug reports, but I've been unable to find the
> email saying so.


Not that I know of.  There is a Python 3000 group on SF.  We just don't want
people reporting bugs saying that there code doesn't work on that branch.
But reporting bugs like this where new stuff is not working as it should can
be reported.  It just doesn't hurt (for now) to say here you found the bug
as well as not that many people are hacking on the p3yk branch.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/attachments/20061219/b70e1ec8/attachment.htm