On 28 August 2015 at 00:25, Nick Coghlan
I'd suggest including a clearer motivation there:
Note: The asyncio package has been included in the standard library on a provisional basis, and thus may gain new APIs and capabilities in maintenance releases as it matures. Backwards incompatible changes may occur if deemed absolutely necessary by the core developers.
I'm happy with a statement like this offering additional guidance, but I think that formally we should stick with the current provisional-or-not situation (with asyncio remaining provisional for another release, if the asyncio devs feel that's needed). Ultimately, end users only really have two choices - use a library or not - so adding extra levels of "provisionalness" actually complicates their choice rather than simplifying it. Paul