RetroSearch Browse

Mon Nov 8 17:18:59 CET 2010 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-November/105391.html

On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 17:02:24 +0100, <merwok at netwok.org> wrote:
> If there is no enormous difficulty in maintaining compatibility, I think
> the usual deprecation process should be followed.  We donâ€™t know who is
> using pydoc as a library, so letâ€™s play safe and not risk breaking their
> code (especially considering that it must not have been easy to write
> code extending pydoc :).
> 
> BTW, doesnâ€™t the process start with PendingDeprecationWarnings, then
> DeprecationWarnings?

No, PendingDeprecationWarning was something used when we wanted a
default-silent deprecation warning for a while before doing an
actual deprecation.  Now that deprecation warnings are silent
by default we'll probably never need PendingDeprecationWarning ever
again :)

--David

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-November/105391.html below:

[Python-Dev] Backward incompatible API changes in the pydoc module