[Patrick K. O'Brien]
> So perhaps we need some sort of concept of a "grace period" on brand-new
> features during which blemishes can be polished off, even if the polishing
> breaks backward compatibility. [...] Would something like this be an
> acceptable compromise?
I know it was not the original intent of importing from __future__,
but maybe this could be linked with __future__ as well. People wanting
guaranteed stability should just never import from __future__ at all,
It's just an idea, I'm not pushing for it. I do not even like it...
For one, I'm quite ready to adjust the things I'm responsible for, whenever
the need arises, not being part of the bullet tied to Python development.
On the other hand, I know administrators not far from me that get very
upset when they learn about specification changes for any software they
rely on for production, and I do understand their need for a peaceful life.
Surely, it's not easy to please everybody. In French, there is this nice
proverb, which is in fact the last verses of one of LaFontaine's fables:
"On ne peut, dit le meunier,
plaire à tout le monde et à son père:
bien faire et laisser braire!".
In word, that means "do well and let mumble!". :-)
--
François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
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