On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Georg Brandl <g.bra...@gmx.net> wrote: > With 3.3a3 tagged and the beta stage currently 2 months away, I would like > to draw your attention to the following list of possible features for 3.3 > as specified by PEP 398:
A few of those are on my plate, soo... > * PEP 395: Qualified Names for Modules I'm currently thinking I'll defer this to 3.4. With the importlib change and PEP 420, there's already going to be an awful lot of churn in that space for 3.3, plus I have other things that I consider more important that I want to get done first. > * PEP 405: Python Virtual Environments I pinged Carl and Vinay about the remaining open issues yesterday, and indicated I'd really like to have something I can pronounce on soon so we can get it into the fourth alpha on May 26. I'm hoping we'll see the next draft of the PEP soon, but the ball is back in their court for the moment. > * PEP 3144: IP Address manipulation library This is pretty close to approval. Peter's addressed all the substantive comments that were made regarding the draft API, and he's going to provide an update to the PEP shortly that should get it into a state where I can mark it as Approved. Integration of the library and tests shouldn't be too hard, but it would really help if a sphinx expert could take a look at my Stack Overflow question [1] about generating an initial version of the API reference docs. (I've been meaning to figure out the right mailing list to send sphinx questions to, but haven't got around to it yet). [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10377576/emit-restructuredtext-from-sphinx-autodoc > * Breaking out standard library and docs in separate repos? Our current development infrastructure simply isn't set up to cope with this. With both 407 and 413 still open (and not likely to go anywhere any time soon), this simply isn't going to happen for 3.3. > Benjamin: I'd also like to know what will become of PEP 415. I emailed Guido and Benjamin about that one the other day. I'll be PEP czar, and the most likely outcome is that I'll approve the PEP as is and we'll create a separate tracker issue to discuss the exact behaviour of the traceback display functions when they're handed exceptions with __suppress_context__ set to False and __cause__ and __context__ are both non-None (Benjamin's patch preserves the status quo of only displaying __cause__ in that case, which I don't think is ideal, but also don't think is worth holding up PEP 415 over). I'm still waiting to hear back from Benjamin though. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
