Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> added the comment:
So, I think we're in a local minima here. As I said earlier, neither the old nor new names really grab me, and I think everyone has aknowledged that the new name is -at best- confusing. We don't need *any more discussion* about that. The question is how to fix it without yet more rounds of 'well this is confusing so lets change it again'. I want to suggest some basic criteria for a dramatically better name, just to unblock this. - follow the existing assert<modifiers><relation> naming convention - be short enough to be comfortably usable - pass some user testing: do some lightning talks. Or ask on twitter for folk to tell you what the proposed name does without any hints. - follow up here with how you tested and the name you've chosen based on that testing. - we'll then do a straw poll amongst a few committers - me and michael at a minimum, and advise on go/nogo. Once thats done I'll happily review a patch that adds a new, better name as an alias, and doesn't deprecate the existing one. I'm leaving the bug in rejected status, because at this point there is nothing any committers seem to have appetite/energy to do: same as per https://bugs.python.org/msg266244 ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue27071> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
