>>> Guido van Rossum wrote > Note that I was just in time checking in the backward compatibility > bool(), True and False builtins (returning ints, of course). If > Anthony is listening, could I add those to 2.1.3 too? This will ease > backporting 2.3 code to 2.1.3 and 2.2.1. I can't decide on whether this should go in 2.1.3 or not. On the plus side, it's unlikely to break things. On the minus side, it is breaking the "contract"[*] about what goes into a minor release. [*] where "contract" is between the python developers and the people who install and use it. up until now, we've said 'minor releases are bugfixes only' - changing this at the last minute before a release feels a bit wrong, somehow. Given the nature of the bug fixes in 2.1.3, I _really_ don't want to give people _any_ fears that they might have backwards compatability concerns to deal with. I can't see any way that adding bool/True/False to 2.1.3 will break things, but it's a perceptions thing, I guess. I just want to see 2.1, 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 go away :) Hm. At this point (well, at the point I got Guido's email), the 2.1.3 release is pretty much done but for . make install on creosote. . rename the file in ftp.python.org (it's called rc0 right now). . pushing the 'hidden->active' button on sf. . sending the email announcement. If I'm going to add this, I'll need to recut the release. In any case, I'm not going to do this right now (it's late) - I'll look at it first thing tomorrow and try to decide then. I really _would_ like feedback, though. Anthony
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