"Nick Coghlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
| > I don't think that an administrative problem such as forward-
| > porting patches to 3.x warrants breakage in the 2.x branch.
| >
| > After all, the renaming was approached for Python 3.0 and not
| > 2.6 *because* it introduces major breakage.
| >
| > AFAIR, the discussion on the stdlib-sig also didn't include the
| > plan to backport such changes to 2.6. Otherwise, we would have
| > hashed them out there.
|
| I think MAL is 100% correct here (and I expect Raymond will chime in to
| support him at some point as well).

For what little it's worth, I was surprised too that the 3.0 renames were 
backported as thr default versions.  It strikes me as possibly a 'bridge 
too far' ;-).

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

Reply via email to