Actually this should not be a fork of the upstream library. The goal is to improve stability and predictability of the ElementTree implementations in the stdlib, and to fix some bugs. I thought that it is better to backport the fixes from upstream than to fix each bug separately in the stdlib.
I try to get some clear assessment from Fredrik. If it is accepted, I will probably cut some parts which are in the upstream library, but which are not in the API 1.2. If it is not accepted, it is bad news for the "xml.etree" users...
Not sure about the timing, but in case you have not got the message: we should rather drop ElementTree from the standard library than integrate unreleased changes from an experimental upstream repository.
It is qualified as a "best effort" to get something better for ET. Nothing else.
Unfortunately, it hurts ET users if it ultimately leads to a fork, or to a removal of ET from the standard library. Please be EXTREMELY careful. I urge you not to act on this until mid-March (which is the earliest time at which Fredrik has said he may have time to look into this). Regards, Martin