Guido van Rossum wrote: > Perhaps the following compromise can be made: the PSF accepts patches > from reputable platform maintainers. (Of course, like all > contributions, they must be of high quality and not break anything, > etc., before they are accepted.) If such patches cause problems with > later Python versions, the PSF won't maintain them, but instead invite > the original contributors (or other developers who are interested in > that particular port) to fix them. If there is insufficient response, > or if it comes too late given the PSF release schedule, the PSF > developers may decide to break or remove support for the affected > platform.
This is indeed the compromise I was after. If the contributors indicate that they will maintain it for some time (which happened in this case), then I can happily accept any port (and did indeed in the past). In the specific case, there is an additional twist that we deliberately removed DOS support some time ago, and listed that as officially removed in a PEP. I understand that djgpp somehow isn't quite the same as DOS, although I don't understand the differences (anymore). But if it's fine with you, it is fine with me. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
