[Python-Dev] Proposal to revert r54204 (splitext change)
Phillip J. Eby
pje at telecommunity.com
Wed Mar 14 21:35:31 CET 2007
At 06:47 PM 3/14/2007 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>Phillip J. Eby schrieb:
> > This backwards-incompatible change is therefore contrary to policy and
> > should be reverted, pending a proper transition plan for the change
> > (such as introduction of an alternative API and deprecation of the
> > existing one.)
>I'm clearly opposed to this proposal, or else I wouldn't have committed
>the change in the first place.
That much is obvious. But I haven't seen any explanation as to why
explicitly-documented and explicitly-tested behavior should be treated as a
bug in policy terms, just because people don't like the documented and
So far, the only policy justification I've seen you give was along the
lines of, "I volunteered to do it, so I get to decide".
If this statement were actually a valid policy, then I suppose I could
simply volunteer to decide to revert the change. But if it's *not* a valid
policy, then there is no policy justification for the change, and therefore
it should be reverted.
Thus, either way, there needs to be some *other* justification for the
More information about the Python-Dev