Ned Deily <n...@python.org> added the comment: Now that we know that this change *does* break some existing code, I think it is worth having that talk as mentioned in PR 5481:
"I suppose it's possible that this will break existing code, but I'd argue that because current behavior runs counter to the documentation and makes no sense given the inconsistencies, it is better to fix them. I propose this change be applied to 3.7 and 3.6, although if you, my friendly reviewer, disagrees about 3.6, we can talk about it!" The question I have is: is the problem the backport is trying to fix severe enough to cause package regressions in the middle of a maintenance release cycle? Sure, the third-party packages should be fixed and such a change is fine for 3.7 but we also kinda promise that installing a maintenance release should be painless. I don't know what is the right answer and I don't want to spend a lot of time on this but I'd like to get a bit more input on this before we go ahead with releasing it in 3.6.5. ---------- nosy: +brett.cannon, ncoghlan, ned.deily resolution: wont fix -> stage: resolved -> status: closed -> open _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue32872> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
