Early july I submitted a bug report ( http://www.python.org/sf/576990 ). Although Raymond Hettinger briefly looked at it (closed it, and the re-opened it), there's presently no assignee for the bug. I am certainly willing to do the work myself, but before doing so, I'd like to be sure that I understand the non-repsonse correctly. I see several possibilities:
1. This is not a bug but somebody forgot to tell me.
2. This is a completely trivial to solve, but everybody overlooked it.
3. This is a small bug, only seen in a marginal corner case that is of no particular interest to anyone, so there is no reason ( and certainly no time) for anybody to respond and/or solve this
4. This is a mildly interesting, but relatively obscure bug, that might be straightforward to solve if somebody had the spare time. (what spare time?)
5. This is clearly a profound and interesting bug, but solving this seems to involve cans of worms, ten-foot poles, and a re-write of the core.
I supsect that in this case the answer lies somewhere between 3 and 4. I just want to make sure that this is not a type 1, 2 or 5 bug.
Ok. So this is actually a blatant attempt to get someone to look at this again before 2.2.2 goes out the door. On the other hand, I really am willing to do the work (clarify the report, give more use-cases, explain the reasoning behind the patch, implement alternative solutions).