RetroSearch Browse

Sun Jun 18 21:50:00 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-June/066168.html

On 6/18/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
> > Anyway, it looks like someone has added this module to the list of
> > backward-compatible modules in PEP 291.  Regarding whether we want
> > it to be on that list (i.e. whether or not this backward-compatibility
> > should be retained as Python moves forward), i'm happy to have it
> > either way.
>
> In that case, I think we shouldn't require 2.3 compatibility. There
> is no reason to deliberately break it either, of course.
>

I agree with Martin.  We can try to avoid the issue  (and usually people
should to make backporting fixes easier), but adding that hinderance can be
a real pain, especially as we get farther and farther away from 2.3 .

> As for the comment: It apparently *is* misleading, George mistakenly
> took it as a requirement for future changes, rather than a factual
> statement about the present (even though it uses the tense of simple
> present). Anybody breaking 2.3 compatibility will have to remember
> to remove the comment, which he likely won't.
>

I think it is better to add a comment in the external release that it is
backwards compatible somewhere, but leave it out of the core.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060618/25badb76/attachment.html 

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-June/066168.html below:

[Python-Dev] uuid backward compatibility