Marc-Andre Lemburg added the comment: On 07.06.2016 15:12, Donald Stufft wrote: > > Since there's obviously contention about what the right answer here is, I > suggest we should revert the patch (since the old behavior already exists in > 3.5 and is shipped to thousands of people already, and status quo wins) and > then continue the discussion about what to do further beyond that. At the > very least, if something isn't decided prior to Larry cutting a release, then > it should be reverted then.
Wait. Under that argument, every regression we introduce would be deemed fine and not bug, because the "status quo wins". I'm sorry, but that's non sense. Python 3.5 introduced a regression w/r to the behavior of os.urandom() compared to Python 3.4 and older releases. If someone wants getrandom() behavior, we should add a new API for this and fix the regression in os.urandom(). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue26839> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
