[Python-Dev] Freeze exception for http://bugs.python.org/issue23661 ?

2015-07-13 Thread Robert Collins
So unittest.mock regressed during 3.5, and I found out when I released
the mock backport.

The regression is pretty shallow - I've applied the fix to 3.6, its a
one-liner and comes with a patch.

Whats the process for getting this into 3.5? Its likely to affect a
lot of folk using mock (pretty much every OpenStack project got git
with it when I released mock 1.1).

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins 
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Freeze exception for http://bugs.python.org/issue23661 ?

2015-07-13 Thread Robert Collins
On 14 July 2015 at 14:25, R. David Murray  wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:01:25 +1200, Robert Collins 
>  wrote:
>> So unittest.mock regressed during 3.5, and I found out when I released
>> the mock backport.
>>
>> The regression is pretty shallow - I've applied the fix to 3.6, its a
>> one-liner and comes with a patch.
>>
>> Whats the process for getting this into 3.5? Its likely to affect a
>> lot of folk using mock (pretty much every OpenStack project got git
>> with it when I released mock 1.1).
>
> 3.5 hasn't been released yet.  The patch ideally would have gone into
> 3.5 first, then been merged to 3.6.  As it is, you'll apply it to
> 3.5, and then do a null merge to 3.6.  It will get released in the
> next 3.5 beta.

What I'm unclear on is the approval process for doing ^.

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins 
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Freeze exception for http://bugs.python.org/issue23661 ?

2015-07-13 Thread R. David Murray
On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:01:25 +1200, Robert Collins  
wrote:
> So unittest.mock regressed during 3.5, and I found out when I released
> the mock backport.
> 
> The regression is pretty shallow - I've applied the fix to 3.6, its a
> one-liner and comes with a patch.
> 
> Whats the process for getting this into 3.5? Its likely to affect a
> lot of folk using mock (pretty much every OpenStack project got git
> with it when I released mock 1.1).

3.5 hasn't been released yet.  The patch ideally would have gone into
3.5 first, then been merged to 3.6.  As it is, you'll apply it to
3.5, and then do a null merge to 3.6.  It will get released in the
next 3.5 beta.

--David
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Freeze exception for http://bugs.python.org/issue23661 ?

2015-07-13 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 14 July 2015 at 12:28, Robert Collins  wrote:
> On 14 July 2015 at 14:25, R. David Murray  wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:01:25 +1200, Robert Collins 
>>  wrote:
>>> So unittest.mock regressed during 3.5, and I found out when I released
>>> the mock backport.
>>>
>>> The regression is pretty shallow - I've applied the fix to 3.6, its a
>>> one-liner and comes with a patch.
>>>
>>> Whats the process for getting this into 3.5? Its likely to affect a
>>> lot of folk using mock (pretty much every OpenStack project got git
>>> with it when I released mock 1.1).
>>
>> 3.5 hasn't been released yet.  The patch ideally would have gone into
>> 3.5 first, then been merged to 3.6.  As it is, you'll apply it to
>> 3.5, and then do a null merge to 3.6.  It will get released in the
>> next 3.5 beta.
>
> What I'm unclear on is the approval process for doing ^.

During the beta period, 3.5 is open for normal maintenance (i.e.
anything that would be acceptable in a 3.5.1 release).

The 3.5 changes that need a +1 from Larry as release manager are the
ones where beta feedback reveals an "incomplete feature", where we
need to make a more significant change to resolve it that would
normally be disallowed on a maintenance branch (e.g. sorting out the
data model for PEP 492 after Ben Darnell's attempts to integrate
native coroutines with Tornado highlighted a number of shortcomings in
the original design).

The 3.4 branch also remains open for general maintenance until 3.4.4
goes out, at which put I assume Larry will put that branch into
security fix only mode.

I wonder: should we start putting some of these process details for
the different phases in the release PEPs themselves? Larry sent a good
summary to python-committers for 3.5 a while back, but they'd be
easier to find in the PEPs, and it would also make it clear which
aspects a new RM was keeping, and which they wanted to try doing
differently.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   [email protected]   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com