[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 
tested behavior.

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 
original change.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list