[issue22380] Y2K compliance section in FAQ is 14 years too old

2014-09-10 Thread Georg Brandl
Georg Brandl added the comment: +1 -- nosy: +georg.brandl versions: -Python 3.1, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22380 ___

[issue22380] Y2K compliance section in FAQ is 14 years too old

2014-09-10 Thread Ezio Melotti
Changes by Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com: -- keywords: +easy nosy: +ezio.melotti stage: - needs patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22380 ___

[issue22380] Y2K compliance section in FAQ is 14 years too old

2014-09-10 Thread Roundup Robot
Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 071a2620917f by Benjamin Peterson in branch '3.4': y2k compliance, lol (closes #22380) http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/071a2620917f New changeset 02c94b9451f8 by Benjamin Peterson in branch '2.7': y2k compliance, lol (closes #22380)

[issue22380] Y2K compliance section in FAQ is 14 years too old

2014-09-09 Thread Elizabeth Myers
New submission from Elizabeth Myers: As seen at https://docs.python.org/3/faq/general.html#is-python-y2k-year-2000-compliant; this is 2014 - Y2K compliance hasn't been a relevant topic for, well, 14 years, and I doubt this is a frequently asked question nowadays. The As of August 2003