Łukasz Langa <luk...@langa.pl> added the comment: > The documentation should promote RawConfigParser, and note > SafeConfigParser and ConfigParser as remaining for backward > compatibility for existing software.
That is another way to go around this. Anyway, ConfigParser is the least predictable of all three for end users and the documentation should be adjusted to emphasize this. > Maintainers of legacy software > using ConfigParser should be encouraged to convert to SafeConfigParser > (or even RawConfigParser) if possible. That's another comment that should appear in the documentation. > Documentation changes should be sufficient; deprecation warnings > typically generate more pain than good. Isn't is what I was saying above? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue6517> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
