> > > > Sorry for the long post, feel free to flog me with a wet fish ;-) > > > > Trust me, Troels, there have been *much* longer. And the only reason > anyone would want to flog you with an aquatic animal is because you > attached the patch to the email instead of creating a SourceForge patch > item at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=5470&atid=305470 . If > you could do that it would be really appreciated since doing changes to > the patch can be tracked more easily. > Ok, I submitted it as a patch (768442 if anyone is interested) :-) Brett, thanks for the pointer. Now, one question still remains. Should Lib/test/test_module.py be updated to check for this new behaviour or not? Even if my patch is never added to Python, surely the current (imho faulty) behaviour should be tested for, shouldn't it? I don't mind writing the needed tests, I just don't want to waste my time doing it if it's not needed =) Regards, Troels Therkelsen
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4