-On [20080104 02:46], Guido van Rossum ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >See http://bugs.python.org/issue1731. Should we consider it safe to >backport r57216 to 2.5.2? This is Thomas Wouters's code to disable >spurious tracebacks when daemon threads die. We're running some 2.4 >apps with (a variant of) this at Google that get many 1000s of >invocations a day, so I'm pretty confident that it works.
If it fixes a bunch of unnecessary tracebacks which only add confusion whether or not something is working I'm +1 on it. Being on the grunt-side of handling bug reports anything that gets rid of unnecessary bug reports is a good change to backport in my opinion. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ Light-in-Darkness, lift me up from here... _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
