RetroSearch Browse

Wed Mar 29 19:36:57 EDT 2017 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-March/147726.html

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28 March 2017 at 17:31, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:
>> IMO this is a bug, and depending on how many packages are affected it might
>> even call for an emergency 3.6.2. The worst case is that we start getting
>> large numbers of packages uploaded to pypi that claim to be 3.6.0 compatible
>> but that crash like crash with an obscure error when people download them.
>
> Has anyone logged this on bugs.python.org? There's nothing in the
> Fedora bug referenced by the OP that indicates they've done so.

I didn't see one, so: https://bugs.python.org/issue29943

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-March/147726.html below:

[Python-Dev] What version is an extension module binary compatible with