On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Warren DeLano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I still would have to call your management of the problem considerably >> into question - your expertise at writing mathematical software may >> not be in question, but your skills and producing and managing a >> software product are. You have nobody at your organization, which >> sells a product that relies on Python, who follows python-dev? Or who >> even reads the changelogs for new python versions? You should have >> known about the "as" keyword change *over a year ago*, even if the >> import bug was masking the deprecation warning. Everything else aside, >> I can't get past that issue with your complaints. I *have* gone back >> now and read all the posts in all the threads and I still have not >> seen a single post from you even hinting that you might have any >> responsibility in the matter. > > Well then, let me set the record straight on that one point: > > I admit that it was entirely my mistake (and mine alone) to implicitly > assume, by adopting such a logging & persistence architecture (dating > back to 1.5.2, mind you!), that new keywords would not be introduced > into the Python language so as to potentially break all existing Python > code. > > Silly me! How unreasonable. >
Pythons backwards compatibility policy is available here: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0005/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list