Title: Fix pathlib.Path.(r)glob doc glitches.
Type: behavior Stage: patch review
Components: Documentation Versions: Python 3.8, Python 3.7, Python 3.6
Status: open Resolution:
Dependencies: Superseder:
Assigned To: docs@python Nosy List: Mariatta, adityahase, docs@python, gvanrossum, pitrou, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka, terry.reedy
Priority: normal Keywords: patch

Created on 2014-07-24 22:11 by terry.reedy, last changed 2018-07-28 12:22 by steve.dower.

File name Uploaded Description Edit
pathlib.rst.patch Mike.Short, 2016-02-16 02:52 documentation updates review Mike.Short, 2016-02-16 03:03 docstring updates review
Pull Requests
URL Status Linked Edit
PR 8519 open eivl, 2018-07-28 11:14
Messages (7)
msg223902 - (view) Author: Terry J. Reedy (terry.reedy) * (Python committer) Date: 2014-07-24 22:11
1. The pattern argument for .(r)glob must be relative. I think the docstrings and doc should say so. /pattern/relative pattern/

For rglob: '''This is like calling glob() with “**” added in front of the given pattern:'''

2. Currently "glob()" links to the glob module, which does not recognize '**'. It should link to back up to the Pathlib.glob entry, where the effect of '**' is defined. (I don't currently know the markup for that.)

3. I interpret '''“**” added in front of the given pattern:''' to mean '**' + pattern, so that '*.py' would become '***.py'. It actually becomes the equivalent of '**/*.p'. So I think '**' should be either '**/' or 'a "**" component'.
msg223903 - (view) Author: R. David Murray (r.david.murray) * (Python committer) Date: 2014-07-24 22:23
Do non-relative patterns even make sense?  I was surprised to get a NotImplementedError instead of a ValueError.
msg257509 - (view) Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * (Python committer) Date: 2016-01-05 01:55
Classifying as easy doc bug.
msg290511 - (view) Author: Serhiy Storchaka (serhiy.storchaka) * (Python committer) Date: 2017-03-26 07:05
Can you create a pull request on GitHub Mike?
msg299001 - (view) Author: Aditya Hase (adityahase) * Date: 2017-07-24 17:32
Should I create a Github PR with given patch? If so, how do I give credit to the original author?
msg299003 - (view) Author: Mariatta Wijaya (Mariatta) * (Python committer) Date: 2017-07-24 17:46

The guideline for converting a patch to the PR is documented here:
msg299006 - (view) Author: Terry J. Reedy (terry.reedy) * (Python committer) Date: 2017-07-24 17:59
Since Mike has not responded in more that a week, please go ahead.  Just put "“Original patch by Mike Short."  in the commit comments (if you can, otherwise add a separate comment).  Please add News blurb (see devguide) if you know how, with at least a title line.  Mike has signed the CLA, though it would not matter here since his patch is taken from my message and could be classed as trivial.
Date User Action Args
2018-07-28 12:22:58steve.dowersetkeywords: - easy
2018-07-28 12:20:27steve.dowersetversions: + Python 3.6, Python 3.7, Python 3.8, - Python 3.4, Python 3.5
2018-07-28 11:14:21eivlsetstage: needs patch -> patch review
pull_requests: + pull_request8034
2017-07-24 17:59:31terry.reedysetmessages: + msg299006
2017-07-24 17:46:55Mariattasetnosy: + Mariatta
messages: + msg299003
2017-07-24 17:32:19adityahasesetnosy: + adityahase
messages: + msg299001
2017-03-26 07:05:25serhiy.storchakasetnosy: + serhiy.storchaka
messages: + msg290511
2016-02-16 03:03:06Mike.Shortsetfiles: +
2016-02-16 02:52:55Mike.Shortsetfiles: + pathlib.rst.patch
keywords: + patch
2016-01-05 01:55:09gvanrossumsetnosy: + docs@python, gvanrossum
messages: + msg257509

assignee: docs@python
components: + Documentation
keywords: + easy
2014-07-24 22:23:24r.david.murraysetnosy: + r.david.murray
messages: + msg223903
2014-07-24 22:11:01terry.reedycreate