+1
Release what's fixed already, and then keep going afterwards.
But can somebody address MODPYTHON-53 please. (updating modpython.org website).
--
Deron Meranda
I assume we will be doing a 3.2.7 release if Graham's fix for the
ConnectionHandler / MODPYTHON-102 problem works?
If that is the case I wonder if we should roll in the changes to support
apache 2.2. I scanned mod_python for deprecated or removed apr calls and
can find only one
OK, so shall we schedule the 3.2.x release for 2007, then ?
As for the Apache 2.2 version, what if we roll in your suggested
patch, Jim, then discover a bunch of problem related to it during the
beta tests ? Will we wait until they are all fixed to release the 3.2
version ? Apache 2.2 is quite
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 17:59 +0100, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Once again, it seems that no regression have been introduced in 3.2.6
vs 3.1.4, so we should release it ASAP and try to keep a steady
release rythm afterwards. When we'll get momentum we'll solve a bunch
of problem pretty fast, but it's
On 1/31/06, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
apache 2.2. I scanned mod_python for deprecated or removed apr calls and
can find only one (apr_sockaddr_port_get), plus the missing
APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro.
The apr_sockaddr_port_get() call was introduced by me to support
IPv6 in
On 1/31/06, Deron Meranda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/31/06, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
apache 2.2. I scanned mod_python for deprecated or removed apr calls and
can find only one (apr_sockaddr_port_get), plus the missing
APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro.
The
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
I assume we will be doing a 3.2.7 release if Graham's fix for the
ConnectionHandler / MODPYTHON-102 problem works?
Unfortunately, the answer is yes... As much as we'd like to release it
sooner, I think it's important to not loose the perspective
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
OK, so shall we schedule the 3.2.x release for 2007, then ?
As for the Apache 2.2 version, what if we roll in your suggested
patch, Jim, then discover a bunch of problem related to it during the
beta tests ? Will we wait until they are all fixed to release the 3.2
version
Deron Meranda wrote:
On 1/31/06, Jim Gallacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
apache 2.2. I scanned mod_python for deprecated or removed apr calls and
can find only one (apr_sockaddr_port_get), plus the missing
APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro.
The apr_sockaddr_port_get() call was introduced by me to
I am having problems with posts to python-dev mailing list from home
occassionally disappearing in a black hole. Thus my post on this topic
before Jim brought it up in the first place vanished. What I has said was:
this code runs smoothly, i.e. no segfaults, all tests passed:
FreeBSD 4.9:
Good enough for me. Shall we vote? If so I am:
+1
Jim
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
I am having problems with posts to python-dev mailing list from home
occassionally disappearing in a black hole. Thus my post on this topic
before Jim brought it up in the first place vanished. What I has said was:
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Barry Pederson wrote:
I think this is the general kind of thing we're looking for though,
with some mistaken pointer/memory operation.
Too bad we can't write *everything* in python. :(
You haven't been following PyPy then? :-)
David
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
buffer += bufsize;
On a second thought - yes, you're right :-)
And if he's not then there is a bug in filter_read since that is what it
does and it is very similar to _conn_read.
Jim
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
On 29/01/2006, at 1:29 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
Volodya wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 10:28:24AM -0500, Gregory (Grisha)
Trubetskoy wrote:
OK, and I see Ron sent a Solaris 10 +1, which is good. I think we
need a FreeBSD +1 - perhaps not necessarily 6.0, but
Barry Pederson wrote ..
As I mentioned in another message, I did some experimenting with
disabling other unittests and found if you disable just
test_fileupload, all the remaining tests including
test_connectionhandler pass.
If you disable everything except test_fileupload and
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Dang, it's frustrating not being able to reproduce this bug in Linux.
I suppose it's maybe something to do with different malloc
implementations or such. I haven't seen any +1s for OpenBSD, which
would be interesting to see since they added some stuff in 3.8 to help
Grisha wrote ..
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
I don't know if this is the answer to the problem, but it looks like
a bug
anyway. In connobject.c starting at line 133:
/* time to grow destination string? */
if (len == 0 bytes_read == bufsize) {
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Grisha wrote ..
buffer = bufsize;
I suspect you mean't:
buffer += bufsize;
buffer = bufsize should be correct because you move the pointer to the end
of where the bufer was. buffer += bufsize would set it further
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
buffer += bufsize;
On a second thought - yes, you're right :-)
Grisha
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 10:28:24AM -0500, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
OK, and I see Ron sent a Solaris 10 +1, which is good. I think we need a
FreeBSD +1 - perhaps not necessarily 6.0, but something...
FreeBSD 4.9
In my case PythonConnectionHandler test fails.
Tested on:
Volodya wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 10:28:24AM -0500, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
OK, and I see Ron sent a Solaris 10 +1, which is good. I think we need a
FreeBSD +1 - perhaps not necessarily 6.0, but something...
FreeBSD 4.9
In my case PythonConnectionHandler test fails.
Maybe I forgot to send this one in:
+1
Solaris 10 Sparc
Apache-2.0.55 mpm-prefork
Python-2.4.2
cheers,
Ron
Ron Reisor [EMAIL PROTECTED] (RWR3)
University of Delaware Information Technologies/Network and Systems Services
Computing Center/192 South Chapel Street/Newark DE, 19716
pgp finger
It seems like any 3.2.6 testing that is going to be done, has been done.
How long do we wait before making a decision for an official release.
If we don't get cracking on 3.3 soon Graham's gonna fill another couple
of pages on JIRA and we'll never catch up. :)
Jim
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
It seems like any 3.2.6 testing that is going to be done, has been done.
How long do we wait before making a decision for an official release.
If we don't get cracking on 3.3 soon Graham's gonna fill another couple
of pages on JIRA and we'll never catch up. :)
You
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
It seems like any 3.2.6 testing that is going to be done, has been done.
I've been kinda swamped with unrelated things past two weeks, so I wasn't
paying much attention. Perhaps an e-mail summarizing the +1's so far and a
quick vote of the core
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
It seems like any 3.2.6 testing that is going to be done, has been done.
I've been kinda swamped with unrelated things past two weeks, so I
wasn't paying much attention. Perhaps an e-mail summarizing the +1's so
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
It seems like any 3.2.6 testing that is going to be done, has been done.
I've been kinda swamped with unrelated things past two weeks, so I
wasn't paying much attention. Perhaps an e-mail summarizing the +1's so
27 matches
Mail list logo
