RetroSearch Browse

Wed Jan 28 22:24:13 CET 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-January/085625.html

Steve Holden wrote:
> 2.6 showed it in the
> inclusion (later recognizable as somewhat ill-advised so late in the
> day) of multiprocessing;

Given the longstanding fork() bugs that were fixed as a result of that
inclusion, I think that ill-advised is too strong... could it have done
with a little more time to bed down multiprocessing in particular?
Possibly. Was it worth holding up the whole release just for that? I
don't think so - we'd already fixed up the problems that the test suite
and python-dev were likely to find, so the cost/benefit ratio on a delay
would have been pretty poor.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-January/085625.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python 3.0.1