Bob Ippolito wrote: > > On Nov 3, 2004, at 18:26, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > >> Bob Ippolito wrote: >> >>> Argh! It's nothing crazy, it removes incorrect linker flags and >>> delegates two Mac-specific API functions to where they belong. >> >> >> I think Brett's thinking is that if this was a serious problem, >> it should have been fixed months ago. The fact that nobody bothered >> pushing that change before 2.4b1 indicates that the problem is not >> serious. As an incompatible change that fixes a non-serious problem, >> it shouldn't be applied before 2.5, in accordance with PEP 5 >> (which says that an incompatible change must see a deprecation first). > Exactly. It's too late in the release cycle for me to put it in unless Anthony says it is okay. > > The thing is that the incompatible change is going in, but the > compatible changes (the reason for the incompatible change) are not. > This is very peculiar. > Not really. Only one function is being removed. The function rearrangement is not under discussion here. Plus there is the issue of testing. I obviously checked it out and it seems to work, but this is build stuff which can be touchy. If Anthony clears applying all the full patch I will, but otherwise I am playing it safe and waiting until 2.5 . -Brett
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