Eli Bendersky <eli...@gmail.com> added the comment: > > If you want to collect additional feedback, you may want to add some > other > > people to the Nosy list :-) > I did not want more feedback, I wanted to leave time for interested > parties to find this bug for themselves and eventually comment :) > > One question: when I merge the new doc from 3.2 to 3.3, do I remove the > new section, as the cET module is now deprecated? If I do that we’d lose > the indexing (i.e. without a module directive there will be no entry in the > module index not the alphabetical index). I could leave the cET section so > that we get the indexing but change the text to “Deprecated alias of ET.” >
I don't see a need for cElementTree to be indexed in the doc of 3.3 Assuming a new Python user who starts with 3.3, he should not even know about the existence of cElementTree (bar a small notice that says it's deprecated, which will be of no interest to him). The cElementTree module stays in its place in 3.3, but that's only for backwards compatibility. Officially, it doesn't exist :) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14009> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
