Mark Lawrence <breamore...@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > ... >> If the vast majority of Python programmers are focused on 2.7, why are >> volunteers to help fix 2.7 bugs so scarce?
I have not done much work related to Python bug fixing. But, I had bad experience with other open source projects: many of my patches (and bug reports) have been ignored over decades. This caused me to change my attitude: I now report bugs (sometimes with patches) and publish a potential solution in a separate package (--> "dm.zopepatches.*", "dm.zodbpatches.*"). This way, affected people can use a solution even if the core developpers don't care. >From my point of view: if you want help with fixing bugs, you must ensure that there is a high probability that those contributions really find their way into the main development lines. As I understand from other messages in this thread, this is also a problem with Python bug fixing. >> Does they all consider it perfect (or sufficient) as is? I have not much blame for Python 2.7. I see a few minor points * "pdb" is quite weak - but I could fix some (but by far not all) aspects in "dm.pdb". * "https" has been weakly handled in earlier versions, but someone has done the Python 3 backport work in an external package before the backport finally arrived in Python 2.7. >> Should the core developers who do not personally use 2.7 stop >> backporting, because no one cares if they do? I am grateful that the above mentioned "https" backport was finally integrated into Python 2.7 -- even though I find it acceptable to use an external package to get it. Thus, there are people who care. Of course, I will not tell core developers that they must do backporting. If they don't more external packages will come into existence which contain (unofficial) backports. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list