From raymond.hettinger at gmail.com Sun May 1 20:22:02 2011 From: raymond.hettinger at gmail.com (Raymond Hettinger) Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 11:22:02 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] [Python-Dev] Python 3.2.1 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5D8F6095-D052-47F6-A65B-D578A4460F20@gmail.com> On May 1, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: > I'd like to release Python 3.2.1 on May 21, with a release candidate > on May 14. Please bring any issues you think need to be fixed in it > to my attention by assigning "release blocker" status in the tracker. Thanks to http://www.python.org/dev/daily-dmg/ , I've been able to work off of the head every day. Python 3.2.1 is in pretty good shape :-) Raymond -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From barry at python.org Tue May 3 00:35:20 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 18:35:20 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7 schedule Message-ID: <20110502183520.1c9efdc0@neurotica.wooz.org> I'd like to make a Python 2.6.7 release candidate this Friday, May 6, with a final release scheduled for May 20. I've put these dates on the Python Release Schedule calendar. This will be a source-only security release. I see no release blockers for Python 2.6, so if you know of anything that must go into 2.6.7, please be sure there is a tracker issue for it, that 2.6 is marked as being affected, and with a release blocker priority. Cheers, -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From g.brandl at gmx.net Tue May 3 20:27:12 2011 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 20:27:12 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Python 3.2.1 schedule amendment Message-ID: Service announcement from your friendly release manager: Since 3.2.1 is the first release from Mercurial, I'm likely going to need extra time figure out the best process, and to go through PEP 101 and fix it (XXX what do we do with the SVN instructions, which are still valid for 2.6?). Therefore, I've decided to go through the process this weekend already, in order not to screw up the only rc for 3.2.1 (planned for next weekend). And while I'm at it, I figure I can make the result public in any case, so there will be a 3.2.1 beta 1. Since I'm going to work in a separate release branch (clone), there won't be freezes anymore and the additional release won't disturb development during the weekend. Martin, Ned: I would say it's not mandatory for the beta release to have binaries, but you might want to test out your toolchains against the new process too. Georg From martin at v.loewis.de Tue May 3 23:52:06 2011 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=) Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 23:52:06 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Python 3.2.1 schedule amendment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DC07906.9020103@v.loewis.de> > Martin, Ned: I would say it's not mandatory for the beta release to have > binaries, but you might want to test out your toolchains against the new > process too. Indeed. I'd prefer if the release clone is public somewhere, so that I can point my local clones to it. Regards, Martin From ncoghlan at gmail.com Wed May 4 13:50:41 2011 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 21:50:41 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Python 3.2.1 schedule amendment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: > Since 3.2.1 is the first release from Mercurial, I'm likely going to need > extra time figure out the best process, and to go through PEP 101 and fix > it (XXX what do we do with the SVN instructions, which are still valid > for 2.6?). I would say drop them, and add a reference to the source of the last revision that included them for Barry's benefit (although I believe he's doing source-only security releases now, so he'll be skipping most of them). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia From barry at python.org Wed May 4 16:02:28 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 10:02:28 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 3.2.1 schedule amendment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110504100228.1208b903@neurotica.wooz.org> On May 04, 2011, at 09:50 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: >> Since 3.2.1 is the first release from Mercurial, I'm likely going to need >> extra time figure out the best process, and to go through PEP 101 and fix >> it (XXX what do we do with the SVN instructions, which are still valid >> for 2.6?). > >I would say drop them, and add a reference to the source of the last >revision that included them for Barry's benefit (although I believe >he's doing source-only security releases now, so he'll be skipping >most of them). It's fine. When I do the source release, I can just pull up an older rev of PEP 101. BTW, I think last time we decided to do the source releases for 2.5 and 2.6 from SVN, but to also commit the changes to the hg branch. Martin is that what you did for 2.5? -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From barry at python.org Sat May 7 01:24:09 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 19:24:09 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc1 Message-ID: <20110506192409.4edc9c98@neurotica.wooz.org> I actually made the 2.6.7rc1 release and pushed it out to dinsdale, but Martin tells me that the hg and svn branches for 2.6 are not synchronized. Dang, I should have checked that first. I'm going to hold off announcing the availability of 2.6.7rc1 until I have some time to synchronize the branches, and possibly decide whether to do the actual release from hg or svn. Issue 12024 is the release blocker for this. It might mean doing an rc2, but I probably won't get to that for another week. Which I think is okay, because this is basically a self-imposed deadline. Cheers, -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From steve at holdenweb.com Sat May 7 01:44:00 2011 From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 19:44:00 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc1 In-Reply-To: <20110506192409.4edc9c98@neurotica.wooz.org> References: <20110506192409.4edc9c98@neurotica.wooz.org> Message-ID: <621931F3-D3D6-46B5-9475-592B5620BE0A@holdenweb.com> Yeah, haven't heard anyone screaming "When's 2.6.7 going to be production-ready" yet. But the work release managers put in to maintaining prior releases is, I know, much appreciated by many users of such releases. regards Steve On May 6, 2011, at 7:24 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I actually made the 2.6.7rc1 release and pushed it out to dinsdale, but Martin > tells me that the hg and svn branches for 2.6 are not synchronized. Dang, I > should have checked that first. > > I'm going to hold off announcing the availability of 2.6.7rc1 until I have > some time to synchronize the branches, and possibly decide whether to do the > actual release from hg or svn. Issue 12024 is the release blocker for this. > > It might mean doing an rc2, but I probably won't get to that for another > week. Which I think is okay, because this is basically a self-imposed > deadline. > > Cheers, > -Barry > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers -- Steve Holden steve at holdenweb.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dickinsm at gmail.com Fri May 13 10:14:12 2011 From: dickinsm at gmail.com (Mark Dickinson) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 09:14:12 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Python Language Summit at EuroPython: 19th June In-Reply-To: <4DA9ACB5.6030505@python.org> References: <4DA9ACB5.6030505@python.org> Message-ID: Hi Michael, Sorry for the late reply; it's been kinda busy around here. If there are places left, I'll definitely be there at the summit. Congratulations on your impending doom! (And sorry to hear that you might not be there in Florence.) Mark On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Michael Foord wrote: > Hello all, > > This is an invite to all core-python developers, and developers of > alternative implementations, to attend the Python Language Summit at > EuroPython. The summit will be on June 19th and EuroPython this year will be > held at the beautiful city of Florence in Italy. > > ? ?http://ep2011.europython.eu/ > > If you are not a core-Python developer but would like to attend then please > email me privately and I will let you know if spaces are available. If you > are a core developer, or you have received a direct invitation, then please > respond by private email to let me know if you are able to attend. A maybe > is fine, you can always change your mind later. Attending for only part of > the day is fine. > > We expect the summit to run from 10am - 4pm with appropriate breaks. > > Like previous language summits it is an opportunity to discuss topics like, > Python 3 adoption, PEPs and changes for Python 3.3, the future of Python > 2.7, documentation, package index, web site, etc. > > If you have topics you'd like to discuss at the language summit please let > me know. > > Volunteers for taking notes at the language summit, for posting to > Python-dev and the Python Insiders blog after the event, would be much > appreciated. > > All the best, > > Michael Foord > > N.B. Due to my impending doom (oops, I mean impending fatherhood) I am not > yet 100% certain I will be able to attend. If I can't I will arrange for > someone else to chair. > > -- > http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ > > May you do good and not evil > May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others > May you share freely, never taking more than you give. > -- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html > > From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Sun May 15 10:31:37 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 10:31:37 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= Message-ID: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> Hi, This guy rocks! He understood and fixed many subtle bugs like race conditions recently. Example from the NEWS of Python 3.3: - Issue #12060: Use sig_atomic_t type and volatile keyword in the signal module. Patch written by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. - Issue #11849: Make it more likely for the system allocator to release free()d memory arenas on glibc-based systems. Patch by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. - Issue #10517: After fork(), reinitialize the TLS used by the PyGILState_* APIs, to avoid a crash with the pthread implementation in RHEL 5. Patch by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. - Issue #11650: PyOS_StdioReadline() retries fgets() if it was interrupted (EINTR), for example if the program is stopped with CTRL+z on Mac OS X. Patch written by Charles-Francois Natali. - Issue #11811: ssl.get_server_certificate() is now IPv6-compatible. Patch by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. - Issue #8428: Fix a race condition in multiprocessing.Pool when terminating worker processes: new processes would be spawned while the pool is being shut down. Patch by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. - Issue #11757: select.select() now raises ValueError when a negative timeout is passed (previously, a select.error with EINVAL would be raised). Patch by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. etc. I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? Victor From g.brandl at gmx.net Sun May 15 17:30:47 2011 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 17:30:47 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 3.2.1 rc Message-ID: I'm now going to start working on 3.2.1 rc now. There is no checkin freeze, I'll work in . As my goal is to have no commits between rc and final, I'll keep this clone for the final and will *not* merge from the main repo inbetween, except if serious issues or regressions surface. Georg From brian.curtin at gmail.com Sun May 15 18:07:36 2011 From: brian.curtin at gmail.com (Brian Curtin) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 11:07:36 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> Message-ID: On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 03:31, Victor Stinner wrote: > Hi, > > This guy rocks! He understood and fixed many subtle bugs like race > conditions recently. Example from the NEWS of Python 3.3: > > - Issue #12060: Use sig_atomic_t type and volatile keyword in the signal > module. Patch written by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. > > - Issue #11849: Make it more likely for the system allocator to release > free()d memory arenas on glibc-based systems. Patch by > Charles-Fran?ois > Natali. > > - Issue #10517: After fork(), reinitialize the TLS used by the > PyGILState_* > APIs, to avoid a crash with the pthread implementation in RHEL 5. > Patch > by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. > > - Issue #11650: PyOS_StdioReadline() retries fgets() if it was > interrupted > (EINTR), for example if the program is stopped with CTRL+z on Mac OS > X. Patch > written by Charles-Francois Natali. > > - Issue #11811: ssl.get_server_certificate() is now IPv6-compatible. > Patch > by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. > > - Issue #8428: Fix a race condition in multiprocessing.Pool when > terminating > worker processes: new processes would be spawned while the pool is > being > shut down. Patch by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. > > - Issue #11757: select.select() now raises ValueError when a negative > timeout > is passed (previously, a select.error with EINVAL would be raised). > Patch > by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. > > etc. > > I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? > > Victor +1, he's been involved in some tougher issues and has been active for a while now. I haven't looked at many of his patches but he has written several, and his comments on issues have been pretty thorough. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jnoller at gmail.com Sun May 15 18:26:27 2011 From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 12:26:27 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> Message-ID: On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Brian Curtin wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 03:31, Victor Stinner > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> This guy rocks! He understood and fixed many subtle bugs like race >> conditions recently. Example from the NEWS of Python 3.3: >> >> - Issue #12060: Use sig_atomic_t type and volatile keyword in the signal >> ?module. Patch written by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. >> >> - Issue #11849: Make it more likely for the system allocator to release >> ?free()d memory arenas on glibc-based systems. ?Patch by >> Charles-Fran?ois >> ?Natali. >> >> - Issue #10517: After fork(), reinitialize the TLS used by the >> PyGILState_* >> ?APIs, to avoid a crash with the pthread implementation in RHEL 5. >> Patch >> ?by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. >> >> - Issue #11650: PyOS_StdioReadline() retries fgets() if it was >> interrupted >> ?(EINTR), for example if the program is stopped with CTRL+z on Mac OS >> X. Patch >> ?written by Charles-Francois Natali. >> >> - Issue #11811: ssl.get_server_certificate() is now IPv6-compatible. >> Patch >> ?by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. >> >> - Issue #8428: Fix a race condition in multiprocessing.Pool when >> terminating >> ?worker processes: new processes would be spawned while the pool is >> being >> ?shut down. ?Patch by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. >> >> - Issue #11757: select.select() now raises ValueError when a negative >> timeout >> ?is passed (previously, a select.error with EINVAL would be raised). >> Patch >> ?by Charles-Fran?ois Natali. >> >> etc. >> >> I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? >> >> Victor > > +1, he's been involved in some tougher issues and has been active for a > while now. I haven't looked at many of his patches but he has written > several, and his comments on issues have been pretty thorough. Agreed From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Sun May 15 18:44:57 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 18:44:57 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> Message-ID: <1305477897.25074.1.camel@marge> Le dimanche 15 mai 2011 ? 10:31 +0200, Victor Stinner a ?crit : > I would to propose him to commit grant. But I also propose to be his mentor: review all of his patches before commit. Victor From greg at krypto.org Sun May 15 22:47:00 2011 From: greg at krypto.org (Gregory P. Smith) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 13:47:00 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> Message-ID: +1 From solipsis at pitrou.net Mon May 16 15:29:47 2011 From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 15:29:47 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> Message-ID: <1305552587.3623.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> > I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? +1 from me. Regards Antoine. From georg at python.org Tue May 17 20:50:37 2011 From: georg at python.org (Georg Brandl) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 20:50:37 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] [RELEASED] Python 3.2.1 rc 1 Message-ID: <4DD2C37D.7000008@python.org> On behalf of the Python development team, I am pleased to announce the first release candidate of Python 3.2.1. Python 3.2.1 will the first bugfix release for Python 3.2, fixing over 120 bugs and regressions in Python 3.2. For an extensive list of changes and features in the 3.2 line, see http://docs.python.org/3.2/whatsnew/3.2.html To download Python 3.2.1 visit: http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.2.1/ This is a testing release: Please consider trying Python 3.2.1 with your code and reporting any bugs you may notice to: http://bugs.python.org/ Enjoy! -- Georg Brandl, Release Manager georg at python.org (on behalf of the entire python-dev team and 3.2's contributors) From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Wed May 18 22:53:08 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 22:53:08 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> Message-ID: <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> Le dimanche 15 mai 2011 ? 10:31 +0200, Victor Stinner a ?crit : > I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? Including me, we have 4 votes for, none against. I asked him and he would like to become a Python developer. I will ask him for his SSH public key. Should he sign the contributor agreement before his first commit? I commited into Python one year without signing this paper! I will also ask him to sign the paper. Victor From jnoller at gmail.com Wed May 18 23:09:00 2011 From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 17:09:00 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> Message-ID: On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Victor Stinner wrote: > Le dimanche 15 mai 2011 ? 10:31 +0200, Victor Stinner a ?crit : >> I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? > > Including me, we have 4 votes for, none against. > > I asked him and he would like to become a Python developer. > > I will ask him for his SSH public key. Should he sign the contributor > agreement before his first commit? I commited into Python one year > without signing this paper! I will also ask him to sign the paper. > > Victor Yes; please have him sign and send in the contributor agreement, please. From g.brandl at gmx.net Thu May 19 20:33:17 2011 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 20:33:17 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 3.2.1 rc 2 Message-ID: As I've already said in another thread, I plan for 3.2.1 r2 as soon as http://bugs.python.org/issue12084 is fixed. This is hopefully this weekend, but may be next. Final is, as always, one week later. Georg From solipsis at pitrou.net Fri May 20 13:07:40 2011 From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 13:07:40 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> Message-ID: <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> For the record, and since the devguide commit (http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/0e8e3057d7bc) didn't make it to python-checkins (because of http://hg.python.org/hooks/rev/aebbd6f606f3), I have made Charles-Fran?ois a committer after he sent his SSH key. Regards Antoine. Le mercredi 18 mai 2011 ? 22:53 +0200, Victor Stinner a ?crit : > Le dimanche 15 mai 2011 ? 10:31 +0200, Victor Stinner a ?crit : > > I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? > > Including me, we have 4 votes for, none against. > > I asked him and he would like to become a Python developer. > > I will ask him for his SSH public key. Should he sign the contributor > agreement before his first commit? I commited into Python one year > without signing this paper! I will also ask him to sign the paper. > > Victor > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers From jnoller at gmail.com Fri May 20 15:18:00 2011 From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 09:18:00 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: Please make sure he sends in a contributor agreement On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > For the record, and since the devguide commit > (http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/0e8e3057d7bc) didn't make it to > python-checkins (because of > http://hg.python.org/hooks/rev/aebbd6f606f3), I have made > Charles-Fran?ois a committer after he sent his SSH key. > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > Le mercredi 18 mai 2011 ? 22:53 +0200, Victor Stinner a ?crit : >> Le dimanche 15 mai 2011 ? 10:31 +0200, Victor Stinner a ?crit : >> > I would to propose him to commit grant. What do you think? >> >> Including me, we have 4 votes for, none against. >> >> I asked him and he would like to become a Python developer. >> >> I will ask him for his SSH public key. Should he sign the contributor >> agreement before his first commit? I commited into Python one year >> without signing this paper! I will also ask him to sign the paper. >> >> Victor >> >> _______________________________________________ >> python-committers mailing list >> python-committers at python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Fri May 20 15:42:20 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 15:42:20 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> Le vendredi 20 mai 2011 ? 09:18 -0400, Jesse Noller a ?crit : > Please make sure he sends in a contributor agreement I am in contact with Charles-Fran?ois. I asked me to sign the contributor agreement. I told him that it is possible to scan it and send the image to the PSF, but he answered that it's not written in the contributor agreement or in the dev guide. So I don't know if he will scan it and/or send the papier version. Victor From jnoller at gmail.com Fri May 20 16:07:35 2011 From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:07:35 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> Message-ID: On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: > Le vendredi 20 mai 2011 ? 09:18 -0400, Jesse Noller a ?crit : >> Please make sure he sends in a contributor agreement > > I am in contact with Charles-Fran?ois. I asked me to sign the > contributor agreement. I told him that it is possible to scan it and > send the image to the PSF, but he answered that it's not written in the > contributor agreement or in the dev guide. So I don't know if he will > scan it and/or send the papier version. > > Victor > > He can scan it, or take a photo and send it to us. Tell him to contact me if he has issues. From eric at trueblade.com Fri May 20 16:02:33 2011 From: eric at trueblade.com (Eric Smith) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:02:33 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> Message-ID: <195cc178-161b-4b67-a4d4-62516604fca8@email.android.com> (Not sure if this was sent on the first attempt) Also please have him subscribe to python-committers. -- Eric. Victor Stinner wrote: Le vendredi 20 mai 2011 ? 09:18 -0400, Jesse Noller a ?crit : > Please make sure he sends in a contributor agreement I am in contact with Charles-Fran?ois. I asked me to sign the contributor agreement. I told him that it is possible to scan it and send the image to the PSF, but he answered that it's not written in the contributor agreement or in the dev guide. So I don't know if he will scan it and/or send the papier version. Victor_____________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers at python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ncoghlan at gmail.com Fri May 20 17:47:18 2011 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 01:47:18 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> Message-ID: On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Jesse Noller wrote: > He can scan it, or take a photo and send it to us. Tell him to contact > me if he has issues. This comes up every time, so if we can't get the main pydotorg page fixed, we *really* should mention these two alternatives in the devguide. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia From mfoord at python.org Fri May 20 18:15:44 2011 From: mfoord at python.org (Michael Foord) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:15:44 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] =?iso-8859-1?q?Charles-Fran=E7ois_Natali_=28n?= =?iso-8859-1?q?eologix=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> Message-ID: <4DD693B0.4070704@python.org> On 20/05/2011 16:47, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Jesse Noller wrote: >> He can scan it, or take a photo and send it to us. Tell him to contact >> me if he has issues. > This comes up every time, so if we can't get the main pydotorg page > fixed, we *really* should mention these two alternatives in the > devguide. If you want a page on pydotorg fixed you can either get checkin rights for the website and "just do it", or email the pydotorg-www mailing list with the page you want changed and the amendment you want. http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pydotorg-www All the best, Michael Foord > Cheers, > Nick. > -- http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ May you do good and not evil May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others May you share freely, never taking more than you give. -- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html From barry at python.org Fri May 20 23:37:18 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:37:18 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 Message-ID: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> I believe I've reconciled the Python 2.6 hg and svn branches. I've committed the changes to 2.6svn and working on the null merges for the 2.6hg branch. I'll push the latter at some point soonish. Anyway, this means that I will cut 2.6.7rc2 today -- and actually announce it! In the future, if you are going to apply patches to Python 2.6, please do so in both the hg and svn branches, since all 2.6 releases will be done from svn. If you're unsure or don't feel comfortable about doing that, please send me the diff and I'll apply it to 2.6svn. Or create/mark a bug as release blocker on 2.6 and attach the patch. Thanks. I probably don't need to say, no commits to the 2.6svn branch for now please. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From guido at python.org Sat May 21 00:12:51 2011 From: guido at python.org (Guido van Rossum) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 15:12:51 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> References: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> Message-ID: On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I believe I've reconciled the Python 2.6 hg and svn branches. ?I've committed > the changes to 2.6svn and working on the null merges for the 2.6hg branch. > I'll push the latter at some point soonish. ?Anyway, this means that I will > cut 2.6.7rc2 today -- and actually announce it! I hope you did copy the SimpleHTTPServer.py security fix that I just commented on in the tracker. > In the future, if you are going to apply patches to Python 2.6, please do so > in both the hg and svn branches, since all 2.6 releases will be done from > svn. ?If you're unsure or don't feel comfortable about doing that, please send > me the diff and I'll apply it to 2.6svn. ?Or create/mark a bug as release > blocker on 2.6 and attach the patch. I'm not very happy with this requirement to do parallel checkins in hg and svn. IMO everyone except for the release managers should be able to live in the happy illusion that we've migrated to hg completely. Of course I'm fine with having very restrictive policies about checkins to hg branches for old versions where the releases are done from svn. The more restricted the better. But requiring individual developers to maintain parallel svn and hg trees is going too far. > Thanks. ?I probably don't need to say, no commits to the 2.6svn branch for now > please. Happy releasing! -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) From martin at v.loewis.de Sat May 21 00:19:36 2011 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 00:19:36 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> References: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> Message-ID: <4DD6E8F8.60303@v.loewis.de> Am 20.05.2011 23:37, schrieb Barry Warsaw: > I believe I've reconciled the Python 2.6 hg and svn branches. I've committed > the changes to 2.6svn and working on the null merges for the 2.6hg branch. > I'll push the latter at some point soonish. Anyway, this means that I will > cut 2.6.7rc2 today -- and actually announce it! > > In the future, if you are going to apply patches to Python 2.6, please do so > in both the hg and svn branches, since all 2.6 releases will be done from > svn. At the moment, this wouldn't be possible, since the svn is blocked from accepting commit unless they come from you or me. It would be better, IMO, if there was a single developer who would migrate changes to svn, or to have some semi-automatic procedure for that. Regards, Martin From barry at python.org Sat May 21 00:32:29 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 18:32:29 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: References: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> Message-ID: <20110520183229.4a96dc74@neurotica.wooz.org> On May 20, 2011, at 03:12 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: >> I believe I've reconciled the Python 2.6 hg and svn branches. ?I've committed >> the changes to 2.6svn and working on the null merges for the 2.6hg branch. >> I'll push the latter at some point soonish. ?Anyway, this means that I will >> cut 2.6.7rc2 today -- and actually announce it! > >I hope you did copy the SimpleHTTPServer.py security fix that I just >commented on in the tracker. I did. Right now I'm blocked on a test failure for test_urllib2, but it's failing in both the hg and svn branches, so at least it wasn't a result of a bogus merge by me. ;) (I also have a problem with the line-ending changes to various .bat files that where only committed to hg26 but not svn26. I need to resolve those before I can push the reconciliation changes in Mercurial.) >> In the future, if you are going to apply patches to Python 2.6, please do so >> in both the hg and svn branches, since all 2.6 releases will be done from >> svn. ?If you're unsure or don't feel comfortable about doing that, please send >> me the diff and I'll apply it to 2.6svn. ?Or create/mark a bug as release >> blocker on 2.6 and attach the patch. > >I'm not very happy with this requirement to do parallel checkins in hg >and svn. IMO everyone except for the release managers should be able >to live in the happy illusion that we've migrated to hg completely. > >Of course I'm fine with having very restrictive policies about >checkins to hg branches for old versions where the releases are done >from svn. The more restricted the better. But requiring individual >developers to maintain parallel svn and hg trees is going too far. I'm actually okay with that too, as long as the issue that precipitated the commit isn't closed until it's been merged to 2.6svn. Maybe that's the right way to handle this then -- when you commit a fix to 2.6hg, be sure there's an open release blocker issue on 2.6 with either a changeset or diff so that I can do the cross-port. And yes, we should still be very conservative about what lands in 2.5 and 2.6. >> Thanks. ?I probably don't need to say, no commits to the 2.6svn branch for >> now please. > >Happy releasing! Thanks! -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From barry at python.org Sat May 21 00:34:10 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 18:34:10 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: <4DD6E8F8.60303@v.loewis.de> References: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> <4DD6E8F8.60303@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: <20110520183410.7a785c6e@neurotica.wooz.org> On May 21, 2011, at 12:19 AM, Martin v. L?wis wrote: >Am 20.05.2011 23:37, schrieb Barry Warsaw: >> I believe I've reconciled the Python 2.6 hg and svn branches. I've committed >> the changes to 2.6svn and working on the null merges for the 2.6hg branch. >> I'll push the latter at some point soonish. Anyway, this means that I will >> cut 2.6.7rc2 today -- and actually announce it! >> >> In the future, if you are going to apply patches to Python 2.6, please do so >> in both the hg and svn branches, since all 2.6 releases will be done from >> svn. > >At the moment, this wouldn't be possible, since the svn is blocked from >accepting commit unless they come from you or me. > >It would be better, IMO, if there was a single developer who would >migrate changes to svn, or to have some semi-automatic procedure for >that. Yep. It's rather a pain to determine what those changes are though if the best you can do is a recursive diff on the two trees. What do you think about my response to Guido, specifically: if you commit a change to 2.6hg, be sure there's a release blocker issue open on 2.6 so that I can easily find what needs to be cross-ported. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From guido at python.org Sat May 21 02:11:33 2011 From: guido at python.org (Guido van Rossum) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:11:33 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: <20110520183410.7a785c6e@neurotica.wooz.org> References: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> <4DD6E8F8.60303@v.loewis.de> <20110520183410.7a785c6e@neurotica.wooz.org> Message-ID: On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On May 21, 2011, at 12:19 AM, Martin v. L?wis wrote: > >>Am 20.05.2011 23:37, schrieb Barry Warsaw: >>> I believe I've reconciled the Python 2.6 hg and svn branches. ?I've committed >>> the changes to 2.6svn and working on the null merges for the 2.6hg branch. >>> I'll push the latter at some point soonish. ?Anyway, this means that I will >>> cut 2.6.7rc2 today -- and actually announce it! >>> >>> In the future, if you are going to apply patches to Python 2.6, please do so >>> in both the hg and svn branches, since all 2.6 releases will be done from >>> svn. >> >>At the moment, this wouldn't be possible, since the svn is blocked from >>accepting commit unless they come from you or me. >> >>It would be better, IMO, if there was a single developer who would >>migrate changes to svn, or to have some semi-automatic procedure for >>that. > > Yep. ?It's rather a pain to determine what those changes are though if the > best you can do is a recursive diff on the two trees. > > What do you think about my response to Guido, specifically: if you commit a > change to 2.6hg, be sure there's a release blocker issue open on 2.6 so that I > can easily find what needs to be cross-ported. That still requires developers to remember. Isn't there some invocation of hg log --branch that would give you a list of changes on the branch? -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) From nad at acm.org Sat May 21 02:41:38 2011 From: nad at acm.org (Ned Deily) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:41:38 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] Charles-Francois Natali (neologix) References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> <4DD693B0.4070704@python.org> Message-ID: In article <4DD693B0.4070704 at python.org>, Michael Foord wrote: > On 20/05/2011 16:47, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Jesse Noller wrote: > >> He can scan it, or take a photo and send it to us. Tell him to contact > >> me if he has issues. > > This comes up every time, so if we can't get the main pydotorg page > > fixed, we *really* should mention these two alternatives in the > > devguide. > > If you want a page on pydotorg fixed you can either get checkin rights > for the website and "just do it" [...] Done. Let me know if the wording should be changed. http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ --- data/psf/contrib/content.ht (revision 13781) +++ data/psf/contrib/content.ht (working copy) @@ -47,9 +47,9 @@ PSF Licensing FAQ.

Submission instructions

-We currently accept contributor forms either through postal mail, -or through fax. Please print a copy of the form, fill out your -name, address, and initial license, sign it, and send postal +We currently accept contributor forms through postal mail, fax, +or by email. Please print a copy of the form, fill out your +name, address, and initial license, sign it, and either send via postal mail to
Python Software Foundation
@@ -61,6 +61,9 @@ or send it by fax to +1 858 712 8966 +

or scan or take a photo of the signed form and email it to +psf at python.org. +

As the form is designed for future contributions, we ask past contributors to state that their past contributions are also covered under the form; we have one such form for past -- Ned Deily, nad at acm.org From barry at python.org Sat May 21 03:09:02 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 21:09:02 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Cannot push after 2.6svn merge Message-ID: <20110520210902.02d8f0d1@limelight.wooz.org> Okay all you Mercurial experts, I need some help! One of the differences between the Mercurial and Subversion 2.6 branches were the line endings for various Windows files. This change is not appropriate for 2.6, which is in security-fix only mode. I reverted these changes in the Mercurial 2.6 branch, but now I can't push it. I asked around on #python-dev and it was suggested that I add some entries into .hgeol, which I've done: Doc/make.bat = CRLF Tools/buildbot/*.bat = CRLF Tools/msi/merge.py = CRLF PC/VS7.1/*.bat = CRLF PC/VS8.0/*.bat = CRLF Yet the push still fails with the errors below. I don't know how to deal with the pretxnchangegroup.eol hook. Any and all assistance will be greatly appreciated. Cheers, -Barry % hg push pushing to ssh://hg at hg.python.org/cpython searching for changes remote: adding changesets remote: adding manifests remote: adding file changes remote: added 5 changesets with 70 changes to 38 files remote: error: pretxnchangegroup.eol hook failed: Doc/make.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS7.1/build_ssl.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build_env.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build_pgo.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build_ssl.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/env.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/idle.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/rt.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/build-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/build.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/buildmsi.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/clean-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/clean.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/external-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/external-common.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/external.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/test-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/test.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/msi/merge.py in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: transaction abort! remote: rollback completed remote: abort: Doc/make.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS7.1/build_ssl.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build_env.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build_pgo.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/build_ssl.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/env.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/idle.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: PC/VS8.0/rt.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/build-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/build.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/buildmsi.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/clean-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/clean.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/external-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/external-common.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/external.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/test-amd64.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/buildbot/test.bat in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings remote: Tools/msi/merge.py in 03e488b5c009 should not have CRLF line endings -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rdmurray at bitdance.com Sat May 21 03:22:21 2011 From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 21:22:21 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Cannot push after 2.6svn merge In-Reply-To: <20110520210902.02d8f0d1@limelight.wooz.org> References: <20110520210902.02d8f0d1@limelight.wooz.org> Message-ID: <20110521012222.3CF3F250051@webabinitio.net> On Fri, 20 May 2011 21:09:02 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I asked around on #python-dev and it was suggested that I add some entries > into .hgeol, which I've done: > > Doc/make.bat = CRLF > Tools/buildbot/*.bat = CRLF > Tools/msi/merge.py = CRLF > PC/VS7.1/*.bat = CRLF > PC/VS8.0/*.bat = CRLF > > Yet the push still fails with the errors below. I don't know how to deal w= Did you push the .hgeol change first? That seemed to be necessary when I ran into something like this. (But I'm no hg expert, so I could be all wet on this.) --David From martin at v.loewis.de Sat May 21 08:02:44 2011 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiB2LiBMw7Z3aXMi?=) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 08:02:44 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: <20110520183410.7a785c6e@neurotica.wooz.org> References: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> <4DD6E8F8.60303@v.loewis.de> <20110520183410.7a785c6e@neurotica.wooz.org> Message-ID: <4DD75584.6030001@v.loewis.de> >> It would be better, IMO, if there was a single developer who would >> migrate changes to svn, or to have some semi-automatic procedure for >> that. > > Yep. It's rather a pain to determine what those changes are though if the > best you can do is a recursive diff on the two trees. You can do better than that. If the hg and svn changes are in the same order, and have the same commit messages (as they should), you can look at the log of the hg branch to find out what the youngest change is that has been copied; all changes that are more recent then still have to be applied. Regards, Martin From martin at v.loewis.de Sat May 21 08:11:44 2011 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 08:11:44 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Cannot push after 2.6svn merge In-Reply-To: <20110520210902.02d8f0d1@limelight.wooz.org> References: <20110520210902.02d8f0d1@limelight.wooz.org> Message-ID: <4DD757A0.5050904@v.loewis.de> > One of the differences between the Mercurial and Subversion 2.6 branches were > the line endings for various Windows files. This change is not appropriate > for 2.6, which is in security-fix only mode. I reverted these changes in the > Mercurial 2.6 branch, but now I can't push it. For the 2.5 branch, I just accepted that hg and svn will differ in the EOL representation of some files. So when comparing trees, use diff -w or -b. Regards, Martin From martin at v.loewis.de Sat May 21 08:07:27 2011 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 08:07:27 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: <20110520183229.4a96dc74@neurotica.wooz.org> References: <20110520173718.5a9e5f79@neurotica.wooz.org> <20110520183229.4a96dc74@neurotica.wooz.org> Message-ID: <4DD7569F.4030900@v.loewis.de> > I'm actually okay with that too, as long as the issue that precipitated the > commit isn't closed until it's been merged to 2.6svn. Maybe that's the right > way to handle this then -- when you commit a fix to 2.6hg, be sure there's an > open release blocker issue on 2.6 with either a changeset or diff so that I > can do the cross-port. I still think this is asking too much. You can replay all changes to hg by looking at the hg log, and applying them change-for-change. For verification, it might be sufficient to just look at the NEWS entries. Every change to that branch must have a NEWS entry (which is not a new requirement), so after synching, NEWS should be identical in svn and hg. Regards, Martin From senthil at uthcode.com Sat May 21 10:43:01 2011 From: senthil at uthcode.com (Senthil Kumaran) Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 16:43:01 +0800 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 Message-ID: <20110521084300.GC14958@kevin> Hi Barry, On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 06:32:29PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I did. Right now I'm blocked on a test failure for test_urllib2, but it's > failing in both the hg and svn branches, so at least it wasn't a result of a I assume, you managed to resolve it as I saw the release mail from you. Is this in the svn codeline for 2.6.x? Thank you, Senthil From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Sun May 22 16:11:10 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 3.2.1 rc 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1306073470.3057.2.camel@marge> Le jeudi 19 mai 2011 ? 20:33 +0200, Georg Brandl a ?crit : > As I've already said in another thread, I plan for 3.2.1 r2 as soon as > http://bugs.python.org/issue12084 is fixed. This is hopefully this > weekend, but may be next. Final is, as always, one week later. If I would like to touch Python 3.2, but the change doesn't need to be included into Python 3.2.1, can I push directly into the "3.2" branch? Georg: do you work directly on the 3.2 branch, or do you have another repository? A problem is that Misc/NEWS refers to Python 3.2.1 and not yet to 3.2.2. Victor From g.brandl at gmx.net Sun May 22 18:34:56 2011 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 18:34:56 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 3.2.1 rc 2 In-Reply-To: <1306073470.3057.2.camel@marge> References: <1306073470.3057.2.camel@marge> Message-ID: On 05/22/11 16:11, Victor Stinner wrote: > Le jeudi 19 mai 2011 ? 20:33 +0200, Georg Brandl a ?crit : >> As I've already said in another thread, I plan for 3.2.1 r2 as soon as >> http://bugs.python.org/issue12084 is fixed. This is hopefully this >> weekend, but may be next. Final is, as always, one week later. > > If I would like to touch Python 3.2, but the change doesn't need to be > included into Python 3.2.1, can I push directly into the "3.2" branch? I will split the 3.2.1rc2 release branch from the main branch next week, so commits done to 3.2 now go into 3.2.1. But it seems your change isn't fit for any 3.2 anyway. > Georg: do you work directly on the 3.2 branch, or do you have another > repository? Once rc2 is split, I'll work in the same release clone I used for rc1. > A problem is that Misc/NEWS refers to Python 3.2.1 and not yet to 3.2.2. That's just fine as it is. Georg From jcea at jcea.es Mon May 23 03:09:18 2011 From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 03:09:18 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 3.2.1 rc 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DD9B3BE.1090102@jcea.es> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 19/05/11 20:33, Georg Brandl wrote: > As I've already said in another thread, I plan for 3.2.1 r2 as soon as > http://bugs.python.org/issue12084 is fixed. This is hopefully this > weekend, but may be next. Final is, as always, one week later. Would you comment about the push policy to 3.2 branch?. Are you doing the release work in a separate clone?. Can we push to 3.2 with no restrictions?. That would be a very nice side effect of mercurial migration. - -- Jesus Cea Avion _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org _/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/_/_/ . _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "Things are not so easy" _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "My name is Dump, Core Dump" _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQCVAwUBTdmzvplgi5GaxT1NAQInFQP8CCrC34ShasTq1OeyCnlZynOib4mGmpxK 27/wDnasq4amVmJNoXaxWmuiRHVzfXPtcph/lYb1kySpKBUaWotmznJBGPdTi4MO 52Za2+qhLWT3L2Dbm3g8Rg+jTinqzSiERMy998jSvK8Wwa1VIpiBgL08EKOiS4Qj 5CYYtT7owjc= =bnvI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From barry at python.org Mon May 23 03:24:20 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 21:24:20 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Cannot push after 2.6svn merge In-Reply-To: <20110521012222.3CF3F250051@webabinitio.net> References: <20110520210902.02d8f0d1@limelight.wooz.org> <20110521012222.3CF3F250051@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: <20110522212420.1a3ed7b3@limelight.wooz.org> On May 20, 2011, at 09:22 PM, R. David Murray wrote: >On Fri, 20 May 2011 21:09:02 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: >> I asked around on #python-dev and it was suggested that I add some entries >> into .hgeol, which I've done: >> >> Doc/make.bat = CRLF >> Tools/buildbot/*.bat = CRLF >> Tools/msi/merge.py = CRLF >> PC/VS7.1/*.bat = CRLF >> PC/VS8.0/*.bat = CRLF >> >> Yet the push still fails with the errors below. I don't know how to deal w= > >Did you push the .hgeol change first? I just did. >That seemed to be necessary when I ran into something like this. (But I'm no >hg expert, so I could be all wet on this.) Splish splash! :) I'm still getting the same failures, even after pushing the .hgeol change only (in 2.6), then merging that back to my cpython clone. Anybody have any other ideas? I'd like to do this right, but if it can't be done, I'll live with the line ending changes in the hg repo. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ncoghlan at gmail.com Mon May 23 08:26:20 2011 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:26:20 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Charles-Francois Natali (neologix) In-Reply-To: References: <1305448297.23358.2.camel@marge> <1305751988.27389.3.camel@marge> <1305889660.3589.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1305898940.6368.3.camel@marge> <4DD693B0.4070704@python.org> Message-ID: On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Ned Deily wrote: > In article <4DD693B0.4070704 at python.org>, > ?Michael Foord wrote: >> On 20/05/2011 16:47, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Jesse Noller ?wrote: >> >> He can scan it, or take a photo and send it to us. Tell him to contact >> >> me if he has issues. >> > This comes up every time, so if we can't get the main pydotorg page >> > fixed, we *really* should mention these two alternatives in the >> > devguide. >> >> If you want a page on pydotorg fixed you can either get checkin rights >> for the website and "just do it" [...] > > Done. ?Let me know if the wording should be changed. Looks good to me - thanks! It was one of those things where "must ask pydotorg to fix that" somehow never translated into actually *asking* pydotorg to fix it :) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia From g.brandl at gmx.net Mon May 23 19:35:15 2011 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:35:15 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 3.2.1 rc 2 In-Reply-To: <4DD9B3BE.1090102@jcea.es> References: <4DD9B3BE.1090102@jcea.es> Message-ID: On 23.05.2011 03:09, Jesus Cea wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 19/05/11 20:33, Georg Brandl wrote: >> As I've already said in another thread, I plan for 3.2.1 r2 as soon as >> http://bugs.python.org/issue12084 is fixed. This is hopefully this >> weekend, but may be next. Final is, as always, one week later. > > Would you comment about the push policy to 3.2 branch?. > > Are you doing the release work in a separate clone?. Can we push to 3.2 > with no restrictions?. That would be a very nice side effect of > mercurial migration. I've already said that: yes, there is no restriction. I will take all changes into rc2. It will take the role of rc1, hopefully without blockers this time. Georg From barry at python.org Mon May 23 20:32:47 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 14:32:47 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Python 2.6.7rc2 In-Reply-To: <20110521084300.GC14958@kevin> References: <20110521084300.GC14958@kevin> Message-ID: <20110523143247.05dad3f2@neurotica.wooz.org> On May 21, 2011, at 04:43 PM, Senthil Kumaran wrote: >I assume, you managed to resolve it as I saw the release mail from >you. Is this in the svn codeline for 2.6.x? Yes. I just added req.timeout call that I saw in several other tests, which made it pass. Cheers, -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From barry at python.org Mon May 23 21:39:12 2011 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 15:39:12 -0400 Subject: [python-committers] Cannot push after 2.6svn merge In-Reply-To: <4DD757A0.5050904@v.loewis.de> References: <20110520210902.02d8f0d1@limelight.wooz.org> <4DD757A0.5050904@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: <20110523153912.1eadbee2@neurotica.wooz.org> On May 21, 2011, at 08:11 AM, Martin v. L?wis wrote: >> One of the differences between the Mercurial and Subversion 2.6 branches >> were the line endings for various Windows files. This change is not >> appropriate for 2.6, which is in security-fix only mode. I reverted these >> changes in the Mercurial 2.6 branch, but now I can't push it. > >For the 2.5 branch, I just accepted that hg and svn will differ in the >EOL representation of some files. So when comparing trees, use diff -w >or -b. Yeah, after my latest hg debacle, this is the only sane way to go. Just in case it isn't obvious, the eol hook prevents pushing any changeset where the files have CRLF. It doesn't have to be on tip. This means if you commit a change w/CRLF and then in a later changeset revert it, you will still not be able to push. Yeah, I found out the hard way. ;) Here's what the devguide has to say about this: "Under Windows, you should also enable the eol extension, which will fix any Windows-specific line endings your text editor might insert when you create or modify versioned files. The public repository has a hook which will reject all changesets having the wrong line endings, so enabling this extension on your local computer is in your best interest." Note: this doesn't necessary pertain just to Windows developers. Also, the description of this hook should include more details, such as the above restriction on *any* changeset, and perhaps instructions on how to install the hook locally so you can't paint yourself into a corner like I did. Many thanks to Ezio, Georg, and RDM on #python-dev for helping me unfubar myself. It required multiple 'hg export|hg import' with some manual trimming of diffs to replay the relevant changes into a fresh repo. Fun time had by all! -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nad at acm.org Sun May 29 12:00:03 2011 From: nad at acm.org (Ned Deily) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 03:00:03 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] Merge cleanup reminder Message-ID: Just a reminder and an FYI: the repo was left yesterday with an unmerged change leaving the 3.2 branch open. When you're finished pushing changes, it's always a good head idea to do an "hg branches" and make sure that only the default (py3k) and 2.7 branches are open: $ hg branches default 70473:e8e8a9dbc3c0 2.7 70470:8349094d1fe8 3.2 70472:791c64fdc405 (inactive) 3.1 70471:bd49031b9488 (inactive) 2.6 70460:23340842e920 (inactive) 2.5 70459:0072a98566c7 (inactive) Since I needed to push some test failure fixes (Issue12205) before the 2.7.2/3.1.4 cutoffs today, I took the liberty of doing a null merge to record. Greg, you might want to double-check that all is as you intended. changeset: 70469:ad3c204cc397 parent: 70468:c5bd972391cd parent: 70465:4f248dd34dd9 user: Ned Deily date: Sun May 29 02:16:36 2011 -0700 files: Lib/test/test_subprocess.py description: Null merge to record previous incorrecly merged changeset from 3.2 branch: changeset: 70465:4f248dd34dd9 branch: 3.2 parent: 70463:7f2e3c466d57 user: Gregory P. Smith date: Sat May 28 09:06:02 2011 -0700 files: Lib/test/test_subprocess.py description: Fix ProcessTestCasePOSIXPurePython to test the module from import when changeset: 70466:2c91045d16a6 parent: 70464:2936e8f12e4f user: Gregory P. Smith date: Sat May 28 09:06:02 2011 -0700 files: Lib/test/test_subprocess.py description: Fix ProcessTestCasePOSIXPurePython to test the module from import when -- Ned Deily, nad at acm.org From greg at krypto.org Sun May 29 12:14:14 2011 From: greg at krypto.org (Gregory P. Smith) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 03:14:14 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] Merge cleanup reminder In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 3:00 AM, Ned Deily wrote: > Just a reminder and an FYI: the repo was left yesterday with an unmerged > change leaving the 3.2 branch open. When you're finished pushing > changes, it's always a good head idea to do an "hg branches" and make > sure that only the default (py3k) and 2.7 branches are open: > > $ hg branches > default 70473:e8e8a9dbc3c0 > 2.7 70470:8349094d1fe8 > 3.2 70472:791c64fdc405 (inactive) > 3.1 70471:bd49031b9488 (inactive) > 2.6 70460:23340842e920 (inactive) > 2.5 70459:0072a98566c7 (inactive) > > Since I needed to push some test failure fixes (Issue12205) before the > 2.7.2/3.1.4 cutoffs today, I took the liberty of doing a null merge to > record. Greg, you might want to double-check that all is as you > intended. > > changeset: 70469:ad3c204cc397 > parent: 70468:c5bd972391cd > parent: 70465:4f248dd34dd9 > user: Ned Deily > date: Sun May 29 02:16:36 2011 -0700 > files: Lib/test/test_subprocess.py > description: > Null merge to record previous incorrecly merged changeset from 3.2 > Thanks. It looks like I did my merge incorrectly, I'll revisit my hg procedures. *flogs self* -gps > branch: > changeset: 70465:4f248dd34dd9 > branch: 3.2 > parent: 70463:7f2e3c466d57 > user: Gregory P. Smith > date: Sat May 28 09:06:02 2011 -0700 > files: Lib/test/test_subprocess.py > description: > Fix ProcessTestCasePOSIXPurePython to test the module from import when > > changeset: 70466:2c91045d16a6 > parent: 70464:2936e8f12e4f > user: Gregory P. Smith > date: Sat May 28 09:06:02 2011 -0700 > files: Lib/test/test_subprocess.py > description: > Fix ProcessTestCasePOSIXPurePython to test the module from import when > > -- > Ned Deily, > nad at acm.org > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nad at acm.org Sun May 29 12:53:19 2011 From: nad at acm.org (Ned Deily) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 03:53:19 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] Merge cleanup reminder References: Message-ID: In article , "Gregory P. Smith" wrote: > Thanks. It looks like I did my merge incorrectly, I'll revisit my hg > procedures. > > *flogs self* Thanks! P.S. I have no idea what "a good head idea" is supposed to be. > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 3:00 AM, Ned Deily wrote: >>When you're finished pushing >>changes, it's always a good head idea [..] -- Ned Deily, nad at acm.org From merwok at netwok.org Sun May 29 18:38:25 2011 From: merwok at netwok.org (=?UTF-8?B?w4lyaWMgQXJhdWpv?=) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 18:38:25 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Merge cleanup reminder In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4DE27681.7080102@netwok.org> Hi, Le 29/05/2011 12:00, Ned Deily a ?crit : > Just a reminder and an FYI: the repo was left yesterday with an unmerged > change leaving the 3.2 branch open. When you're finished pushing > changes, it's always a good head idea to do an "hg branches" and make > sure that only the default (py3k) and 2.7 branches are open: These nifty options will help you see only the relevant heads: $ hg heads --topo # will show e.g. an unmerged 3.1 head in the 3.2 repo $ hg heads . # shows only heads on this named branch Regards From benjamin at python.org Sun May 29 22:55:17 2011 From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 15:55:17 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now Message-ID: Hi, I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going into security only mode. -- Regards, Benjamin From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Mon May 30 00:44:03 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 00:44:03 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <201105300044.04221.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 22:55:17, Benjamin Peterson a ?crit : > Hi, > I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for > 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going > into security only mode. Just to be sure, you mean the 3.1.4 will be the last bugfix release? 3.1.5 will be security fix only? So for example, as Python 2.6, doc updates are no more accepted in 3.1? Victor From benjamin at python.org Mon May 30 00:45:49 2011 From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson) Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 17:45:49 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: <201105300044.04221.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> References: <201105300044.04221.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> Message-ID: 2011/5/29 Victor Stinner : > Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 22:55:17, Benjamin Peterson a ?crit : >> Hi, >> I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for >> 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going >> into security only mode. > > Just to be sure, you mean the 3.1.4 will be the last bugfix release? 3.1.5 will > be security fix only? So for example, as Python 2.6, doc updates are no more > accepted in 3.1? Correct. -- Regards, Benjamin From eliben at gmail.com Mon May 30 08:18:10 2011 From: eliben at gmail.com (Eli Bendersky) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 09:18:10 +0300 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: References: <201105300044.04221.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> Message-ID: >> Just to be sure, you mean the 3.1.4 will be the last bugfix release? 3.1.5 will >> be security fix only? So for example, as Python 2.6, doc updates are no more >> accepted in 3.1? > > Correct. > That's great. Shorter pull dances for all :) Eli From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Mon May 30 23:32:51 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 23:32:51 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <201105302332.51473.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 22:55:17, Benjamin Peterson a ?crit : > Hi, > I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for > 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going > into security only mode. I would like to commit something into the 2.7 branch. The NEWS file starts with: What's New in Python 2.7.2? =========================== *Release date: 2011-05-29* Python 2.7.2 was released yesterday, or was it the RC1? I don't care if my commit (better fix for #1195) doesn't go into Python 2.7.2, so should I start an empty "Python 2.7.3" section? Victor From benjamin at python.org Mon May 30 23:36:03 2011 From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 16:36:03 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: <201105302332.51473.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> References: <201105302332.51473.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> Message-ID: 2011/5/30 Victor Stinner : > Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 22:55:17, Benjamin Peterson a ?crit : >> Hi, >> I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for >> 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going >> into security only mode. > > I would like to commit something into the 2.7 branch. The NEWS file starts > with: > > What's New in Python 2.7.2? > =========================== > > *Release date: 2011-05-29* > > Python 2.7.2 was released yesterday, or was it the RC1? > > I don't care if my commit (better fix for #1195) doesn't go into Python 2.7.2, > so should I start an empty "Python 2.7.3" section? Yes, go ahead. -- Regards, Benjamin From martin at v.loewis.de Tue May 31 07:19:54 2011 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiB2LiBMw7Z3aXMi?=) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 07:19:54 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: References: <201105302332.51473.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> Message-ID: <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> Am 30.05.2011 23:36, schrieb Benjamin Peterson: > 2011/5/30 Victor Stinner : >> Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 22:55:17, Benjamin Peterson a ?crit : >>> Hi, >>> I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for >>> 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going >>> into security only mode. >> >> I would like to commit something into the 2.7 branch. The NEWS file starts >> with: >> >> What's New in Python 2.7.2? >> =========================== >> >> *Release date: 2011-05-29* >> >> Python 2.7.2 was released yesterday, or was it the RC1? >> >> I don't care if my commit (better fix for #1195) doesn't go into Python 2.7.2, >> so should I start an empty "Python 2.7.3" section? > > Yes, go ahead. Really??? I have some changes that I need to commit to 2.7 that do need to go into 2.7.2. So how are you going to manage these? I rather recommend that the 2.7 branch is frozen until the final release, and any changes are only merged afterwards. This is a mess. Regards, Martin From nad at acm.org Tue May 31 07:59:44 2011 From: nad at acm.org (Ned Deily) Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 22:59:44 -0700 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now References: <201105302332.51473.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: In article <4DE47A7A.1060105 at v.loewis.de>, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote: > Am 30.05.2011 23:36, schrieb Benjamin Peterson: > > 2011/5/30 Victor Stinner : > >> Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 22:55:17, Benjamin Peterson a ?crit : > >>> Hi, > >>> I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for > >>> 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going > >>> into security only mode. > >> > >> I would like to commit something into the 2.7 branch. The NEWS file starts > >> with: > >> > >> What's New in Python 2.7.2? > >> =========================== > >> > >> *Release date: 2011-05-29* > >> > >> Python 2.7.2 was released yesterday, or was it the RC1? > >> > >> I don't care if my commit (better fix for #1195) doesn't go into Python > >> 2.7.2, > >> so should I start an empty "Python 2.7.3" section? > > > > Yes, go ahead. > > Really??? I have some changes that I need to commit to 2.7 that do need > to go into 2.7.2. So how are you going to manage these? > > I rather recommend that the 2.7 branch is frozen until the final > release, and any changes are only merged afterwards. I would think the easiest approach is to have a 2.7.2 releasing branch where changes for 2.7.2 are applied and immediately merged into the main 2.7 branch. It's trivial to create such a branch off of the 2.7.2rc1 tag but (I think) you wouldn't be able to push the resulting repo into the main repo because it creates a new head. and there's a hook to prevent that. Someone would have to create it specially. -- Ned Deily, nad at acm.org From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com Tue May 31 10:58:03 2011 From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 10:58:03 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> References: <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: <201105311058.03235.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> Le mardi 31 mai 2011 07:19:54, Martin v. L?wis a ?crit : > >> What's New in Python 2.7.2? > >> =========================== > >> > >> *Release date: 2011-05-29* > >> > >> Python 2.7.2 was released yesterday, or was it the RC1? > >> > >> I don't care if my commit (better fix for #1195) doesn't go into Python > >> 2.7.2, so should I start an empty "Python 2.7.3" section? > > > > Yes, go ahead. > > Really??? I have some changes that I need to commit to 2.7 that do need > to go into 2.7.2. So how are you going to manage these? > > I rather recommend that the 2.7 branch is frozen until the final > release, and any changes are only merged afterwards. > > This is a mess. I did 3 commits in the 2.7 branch. There are all bugfixes, so you can add them to 2.7.2, but I proposed to skip them to not add too much new code between 2.7.2 RC/final versions. I don't know how the release managers work, but if it's possible, I would prefer to be able to continue to commit any change to all branches during the release process. I mean that we should create a branch for each x.y.z version, and only port critical bugfixes to these branches between the RC and the final versions. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3b1b06570cf9 changeset: 70534:3b1b06570cf9 branch: 2.7 parent: 70509:439396b06416 user: Victor Stinner date: Mon May 30 23:44:13 2011 +0200 summary: Issue #12016: my_fgets() now always clears errors before calling fgets(). Fix the following case: sys.stdin.read() stopped with CTRL+d (end of file), raw_input() interrupted by CTRL+c. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b40dac6390a9 changeset: 70537:b40dac6390a9 branch: 2.7 parent: 70534:3b1b06570cf9 user: Victor Stinner date: Mon May 30 23:49:13 2011 +0200 summary: Issue #1195: fix the issue number of the NEWS entry http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/6c6923a406df changeset: 70540:6c6923a406df branch: 2.7 parent: 70537:b40dac6390a9 user: Victor Stinner date: Mon May 30 23:58:21 2011 +0200 summary: Issue #12057: Add tests for ISO 2022 codecs iso2022_jp, iso2022_jp_2 and iso2022_kr Victor From doko at debian.org Tue May 31 11:21:56 2011 From: doko at debian.org (Matthias Klose) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 11:21:56 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> References: <201105302332.51473.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: <4DE4B334.2030708@debian.org> On 05/31/2011 07:19 AM, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote: > Really??? I have some changes that I need to commit to 2.7 that do need > to go into 2.7.2. So how are you going to manage these? > > I rather recommend that the 2.7 branch is frozen until the final > release, and any changes are only merged afterwards. > > This is a mess. two more questions: - How do I follow the "what will become the release" branch? In the past, you could just do an svn update on the branch at any time, but now this is different for development and freeze mode. - What do the buildd's test in freeze mode? It would be bad to only test the branch, which doesn't see any changes. Thanks, Matthias From benjamin at python.org Tue May 31 15:18:14 2011 From: benjamin at python.org (Benjamin Peterson) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 08:18:14 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] 2.7.2 and 3.1.4 rc now In-Reply-To: <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> References: <201105302332.51473.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> <4DE47A7A.1060105@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: 2011/5/31 "Martin v. L?wis" : > Am 30.05.2011 23:36, schrieb Benjamin Peterson: >> 2011/5/30 Victor Stinner : >>> Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 22:55:17, Benjamin Peterson a ?crit : >>>> Hi, >>>> I'm going to start spinning those releases now. I'll make a branch for >>>> 2.7.2 but not for 3.1.4. Please stop committing to 3.1; it's going >>>> into security only mode. >>> >>> I would like to commit something into the 2.7 branch. The NEWS file starts >>> with: >>> >>> What's New in Python 2.7.2? >>> =========================== >>> >>> *Release date: 2011-05-29* >>> >>> Python 2.7.2 was released yesterday, or was it the RC1? >>> >>> I don't care if my commit (better fix for #1195) doesn't go into Python 2.7.2, >>> so should I start an empty "Python 2.7.3" section? >> >> Yes, go ahead. > > Really??? I have some changes that I need to commit to 2.7 that do need > to go into 2.7.2. So how are you going to manage these? I have a release branch from the 2.7.2rc1. It's currently, local, but I will push it (when I get to a computer with my .ssh keys), so you can apply any changes you need to it. Then after 2.7.2, I will merge it to the 2.7 branch. > > I rather recommend that the 2.7 branch is frozen until the final > release, and any changes are only merged afterwards. -- Regards, Benjamin