[04:12:30] <lifeless> dstufft: https://github.com/pypa/interoperability-peps/pull/56/files#r44730474 ready for final review I think
[05:36:31] <abadger1999> lifeless: Thanks. I wonder if what I need (for unittest2 on py3.5) is just to update unitest2/tests/test_loader.py with changes in python-3.5
[05:36:39] <abadger1999> will have to try that later.
[06:07:16] <lifeless> abadger1999: it should just work on python 3.5
[06:08:00] <abadger1999> lifeless: it doesn't. Or at least, the tests don't pass... which could be the tests' fault rather than the actual module's fault.
[07:02:44] <abadger1999> lifeless: Okay, it seems to be confirmed to me that the tests for unittest2 need to be updated to take into account a new format for traceback messages in python-3.5.
[07:04:57] <abadger1999> lifeless: I just did a naive substitution of lines from python-3.5's test_loader.py into unittest2's test/test_loader.py and changed "unittest" to "unittest2" and the test works on python-3.5... But of course, it then fails on 2.7 (probably on 3.4 as well). I'll have to adapt this a little more intelligently to make it work in both places.
[07:34:12] <lifeless> abadger1999: if it is behaving differently on 2.7/3.4/3.5, do you have *any* other patches to unittest2?
[07:34:30] <lifeless> abadger1999: e.g. are you perhaps patching out the use of traceback2, which should be taking care of those differences
[07:35:41] <abadger1999> lifeless: nope. there's apparently a patch that gets rid of the argparse dep.
[07:35:58] <lifeless> abadger1999: upstream uses markers to make that only apply on 2.6
[07:36:03] <lifeless> abadger1999: what release are we talking about ?
[07:36:53] <abadger1999> lifeless: there was a patch that got rid of traceback2 supposedly for bootstrapping on a new python version. Once I changed that so the patch was no longer applied, the unittests started failing.
[07:37:26] <abadger1999> lifeless: so it looks like the unittests work when traceback2 is not being used.
[20:46:50] <lifeless> dstufft: so afaict the dependency specifier stuff is done
[20:47:10] <lifeless> dstufft: where is the process at in your opinion ?
[20:48:47] <dstufft> lifeless: I need to re-review it and then pronounce on it. Has your latest updated been posted to distutils-sig? If not it might be sane to start a final thread with it to let anyone else get one last look at it and I'll try to either get it reviewed tonight or tomorrow
[20:49:36] <dstufft> my truck broke down last night so at some point I'll have to run to the mechanic to pick it up (hopefully... unless it died completely D:) and I'm knocking some stuff out in warehouse ATM, but I think I can hit it tonight
[20:50:04] <lifeless> dstufft: I posted the diffs in the thread
[20:50:46] <dstufft> I don't suspect anyone is going to have much to say, the fiddly bits most won't care about, and it's largely just standardizing wht already exists
[20:50:51] <dstufft> but should give them a chance anyways