"A.M. Kuchling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 02:51:15PM +0100, andrew.kuchling wrote: >> Author: andrew.kuchling >> Date: Thu Nov 9 14:51:14 2006 >> New Revision: 52692 >> >> [Patch #1514544 by David Watson] use fsync() to ensure data is really on >> disk > > Should I backport this change to 2.5.1? Con: The patch adds two new > internal functions, _sync_flush() and _sync_close(), so it's an > internal API change. Pro: it's a patch that should reduce chances of > data loss, which is important to people processing mailboxes.
I am not familiar with the context but I would naively think of data loss as a bug. The new functions' code could be preceded by a comment that they were added in 2.5.1 for internal use only and that external use would make code incompatible with 2.5 -- and of course, not documented elsewhere. tjr _______________________________________________ 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
