Kurt B. Kaiser k...@shore.net added the comment:
OK, thanks, Martin. I'll use 'pending' that way (close after a
while if the bot hears nothing further).
Changing component to IDLE'.
release26-maint: r71908, r71909
--
___
Python tracker
Changes by Kurt B. Kaiser k...@shore.net:
--
components: +IDLE -Build
keywords: +26backport
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5783
___
Guilherme Polo ggp...@gmail.com added the comment:
Kurt, I'm not sure if you misunderstood Martin but there is no such
closing bot here (only if you consider people as bots :)
Anyway, are you porting these to py3k and release30-maint or can someone
else do it ?
--
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Kurt, I'm not sure if you misunderstood Martin but there is no such
closing bot here (only if you consider people as bots :)
There is no such bot *yet*, but may be in a few days.
--
___
Python
Kurt B. Kaiser k...@shore.net added the comment:
I understood Martin completely. The bot is coming RSN. My use
of 'pending' was intended to answer the exact question you just
asked. Maybe I should use Stage: 'commit review'.
Forwardport to py3k: r71952
Backport to 30-maint: r71953
Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment:
Instead, I think such problems must be detected during beta testing.
The fact that it hasn't been detected so far, even though it existed
since 2.6.0, indicates that the problem can't be that serious.
I believe I tried F1 Help once, got the
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Terry, I believe your issue (online docs not found in 3.0) is different
from this issue, so please open a new issue.
I'm leaving this open until the patches have been forward-ported.
--
___
Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment:
My point, relative to this issue, was to explain why I had not commented
before, but also to report that forward porting is needed, and not just
a convenience. I just reported the breakage to webmas...@python.org.
--
Kurt B. Kaiser k...@shore.net added the comment:
The issue that Terry Reedy raised is due to 68801 being forward
ported to py3k but not backported to 2.6-maint or 3.0-maint.
Access in 2.6.2 happens to work because there's a redirect on
the website which points to the correct doc release. But
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
I used 'pending' in the Debian sense of: I'm working it,
expect an upload soon. Unless I'm mistaken, there's no bot
closing 'pending' like there was on SF.
Actually, the Pending status is exactly the one as there was
on SF. The bot
Kurt B. Kaiser k...@shore.net added the comment:
r71812 in trunk. Will port to 3-head 30-maint 26-maint.
Thanks for the patch!
--
resolution: - accepted
status: open - pending
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment:
I think idle should be updated to look for the correct file name.
--
assignee: benjamin.peterson -
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5783
Guilherme Polo ggp...@gmail.com added the comment:
Maybe the functions in Doc/tools/sphinxext/patchlevel.py should be moved
to somewhere else then ? IDLE could use them.
--
nosy: +gpolo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Maybe the functions in Doc/tools/sphinxext/patchlevel.py should be moved
to somewhere else then ? IDLE could use them.
No. IDLE shouldn't parse the version out of the header file, but instead
use sys.version_info to compute the file name,
Guilherme Polo ggp...@gmail.com added the comment:
Fine, Martin. Patch attached for idle only.
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file13724/issue_5783.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5783
Changes by Kurt B. Kaiser k...@shore.net:
--
assignee: - kbk
nosy: +kbk
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5783
___
___
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Fragile solution, but it works. IMO, it's a better design to just have
the file named Python26.chm like it always used to be done. Now, we've
duplicated someones arbitrary logic (ignoring sys.version_info.serial
and special
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Fragile solution, but it works. IMO, it's a better design to just have
the file named Python26.chm like it always used to be done.
That was also fragile, as this bug report demonstrates. It broke when
sphinx decided to put more version
New submission from Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net:
The Doc/Python262.chm file needs to be named Doc/Python26.chm so that
IDLE can find it. The current release cannot find the chm file at all
so it falls back to the on-line docs at http://www.python.org/doc/current .
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
This also applies to Python31a2.chm -- Python31.chm
--
versions: +Python 3.1
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5783
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
It's actually vice versa - IDLE should open the file under its correct name.
--
nosy: +loewis
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5783
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
What changed here? ISTM that IDLE was always looking for the same name
and that the new part is that the build procedure has been been changed
(the step where the make htmlhelp output file is moved to ./Doc and
renamed).
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
It looks like IDLE has been the same since 2004:
http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/idlelib/EditorWindow.py?view=diffr1=36600r2=36601
The correct filename is what has changed.
The release process needs to have a
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Just checked Python2.5.4 and its CHM file is Python25.chm. So
everything is fine with that release.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5783
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
What changed here?
We switched to sphinx, and the makefiles put the full version into the
output files.
ISTM that IDLE was always looking for the same name
and that the new part is that the build procedure has been been changed
(the
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
The release process needs to have a step that validates that the CHM
file works from IDLE.
I personally can't perform such testing steps, perhaps unless somebody
maintains a list of such steps for me.
Instead, I think such problems must
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Just checked Python2.5.4 and its CHM file is Python25.chm. So
everything is fine with that release.
True. The renaming happened with the switch to sphinx.
--
___
Python tracker
27 matches
Mail list logo
