Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
I am not too attached to "my" patch, but because I love Python I really would
like us to land on a solution.
> However I want all changes and new additions to the SSL module to follow PEP
> 543 so I can provide a PEP 543-compatible inter
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Thanks for the discussion.
Since I tried to join the efforts here in 2016 two years ago I was (and still
am) enthusiastic, and willing to invest quite a bit of energy. Still, we have
missed the 3.6 and 3.7 releases to change something about the fact
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Hello! I would very much appreciate if we can find a way for us to get another
review for the last patch.
I did most of the work in August 2016 and got a review from Senthil and
Christian which I processed. When I got back to the patch for converting it
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Hey Antoine, Christian, Senthil!
I have invested quite a bit more time to double-check my responses to the
questions asked so far, clarified where appropriate, and updated the pull
request on GitHub after manually resolving the merge conflicts that
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Hey Senthil and Christian!
> Could you convert your latest patch into PR against
> https://github.com/python/cpython
That was fun. There we go: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/2449
I hope I was not too late with that for the 3.7 devel
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
--
pull_requests: +2506
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16487>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Christian, Senthil, would appreciate if I got another round of feedback (in the
review thread) :-)
--
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Thanks Christian, much appreciated. Just responded to your review.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Hello!
Like everybody in this thread I would love to see this land and have prepared a
new patch, hoping that we can process this still for 3.6.
Antoine summarized the core task here very well:
> Let's stay focused on what is
> necessary to
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38096/issue6634_py27.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6634>
___
___
Python-bug
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Martin, I very much like the order you suggested, thanks. I did not feel
confident enough for re-structuring the entire entry. So, can we agree on using
that for Python 2.7?
Is there a consensus regarding the approach to take for Python 3.5? Except from
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Victor,
I support the idea of sys.command. However, it would be unpopulated most of the
time (e.g. set to None by default). Now, is that something we should push
forward or not? I would work on a patch, but we should have an agreement first,
I guess
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Can these super-small doc patches get applied or should we change something?
Thanks!
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue20
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
I'd love to find an agreement here. I think we are quite close to getting this
closed, so further input is very welcome.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/i
New submission from Jan-Philip Gehrcke:
When Python is invoked with the `-c command` switch, the command string does
not get exposed in sys.argv:
$ python -c "import sys; print(sys.argv)"
['-c']
$ python -c "import sys; print(sys.argv)" arg1
[&#x
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38006/issue18454_py27_prompt_test.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue18
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
First, I want to address the situation in 2.7. Please have a look at my patch
and my reasoning.
This is my setup.py test file content:
from distutils.core import setup
setup(name='foo', version='1.0', packages=['tes
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Thanks for your feedback Antoine.
> I'm not sure what the doc patch achieves.
Let me try to bring things in order. It should achieve two things:
1. Properly describe the stderr-writing behavior of
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37990/issue6634_py27.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6634>
___
___
Python-bug
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file37983/issue6634_py27.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6634>
___
___
Pytho
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
> Regarding the documentation patch: I like to start sentences
> with a capital letter. Perhaps change it to start
> “Calling :func:`exit` only terminates . . .”.
Thanks for feedback. Have now used "Invocation of " to not repeat "
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file37988/issue6634_py35.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6634>
___
___
Pytho
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file37986/issue6634_py35.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6634>
___
___
Pytho
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37988/issue6634_py35.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6634>
___
___
Python-bug
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
For Python 3.5, I have attached a patch that
- adds relevant test cases to test_threading.py which probe
the interpreter's stderr output for compliance with what
the docs state.
- makes sys.exit(msg) write msg to stderr, even if c
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file19006/thread_sys_exit_test.py
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6634>
___
___
Pytho
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
For Python 2.7, we will not change behavior, even if unexpected. Instead, the
sys.exit-docs should be adjusted and
- warn about the fact that nothing is written to stderr
if sys.exit(msg) gets called from a non-primary thread, and
- note
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
I have added patches for the documentation, where I removed the sentence in
question and re-wrapped the paragraph.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue20
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37980/issue20709_tip.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue20709>
___
___
Python-bug
Changes by Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37979/issue20709_py27.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue20
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Windows is the only Python-supported platform where utime did not work for
directories, ages ago, right?
If that is the case, I support Larry Hastings' approach of removing the entire
sentence:
"Whether a directory can be given for path
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
I have updated the patch with a cross-reference to the sorted() built-in, which
explains the arguments.
W.r.t. to Éric's suggestion: the sorted() doc refers to the sorting howto in
the wiki. Now everything is connected.
--
Added file:
New submission from Jan-Philip Gehrcke:
Currently, the tutorial for the list sort method does not show allowed
arguments:
list.sort()
Sort the items of the list in place.
(see e.g. https://docs.python.org/3.4/tutorial/datastructures.html)
Is there a reason why we do not show the
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
We should match the unit test with the documentation for signal.NSIG. Either
the code or the docs or both need to change.
Currently the docs say that signal.NSIG is "One more than the number of the
highest signal number."
("https://docs
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
If you are thinking TL;DR:
This fails on FreeBSD:
>>> signal.signal(signal.SIGRTMAX, lambda *a: None)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
ValueError: signal number out of range
Although of infrequent use, I
New submission from Jan-Philip Gehrcke:
The os.utime() docs for Python 2
(http://docs.python.org/2/library/os.html#os.utime) and 3
(http://docs.python.org/3/library/os.html#os.utime) both contain the sentence
"Whether a directory can be given for path depends on whether the operating
s
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
The version action currently writes to stderr. The _VersionAction(Action)'s
__call__() method finishes off with
parser.exit(message=formatter.format_help())
and parser.exit() by default writes to stderr.
Here, Steven says "Help is definitely i
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
As a follow-up, relevant output from FreeBSD 9:
$ python
Python 2.7.5 (default, Dec 20 2013, 21:12:37)
[GCC 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD]] on freebsd9
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more in
New submission from Jan-Philip Gehrcke:
On FreeBSD, signal.NSIG is smaller than what the documentation promises: "One
more than the number of the highest signal number".
On Linux, the highest numerical signal value is smaller/equal signal.NSIG
(expected behavior):
>>
New submission from Jan-Philip Gehrcke:
When updating an existing project on PyPI via distutils using the upload
command, I observe erroneous behavior regarding the credentials when I do not
want to store my password in clear text in the pypirc file:
(1) When running
python setup.py
Jan-Philip Gehrcke added the comment:
Sorry for the delay.
Before suggesting a doc change to correct/complete the description of the
*current* situation, we actually should consider changing this situation. I
think this is reasonable and I feel encouraged by Gabriel Genellina:
> I see
New submission from Jan-Philip Gehrcke :
Hey there,
hopefully I fill out this form in an adequate way!
I ran into some problems while using sys.exit('msg') together with
threads, which could have been avoided with slightly more information in
the docs here: http://docs.python.o
42 matches
Mail list logo
