[Python-Dev] please back out changeset f903cf864191 before alpha-2
ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sat Aug 24 16:33:22 CEST 2013
On 25 August 2013 00:26, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 August 2013 00:13, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 00:03:01 +1000
>> Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> If Stefan's "please revert this" as lxml.etree maintainer isn't
>>> enough, then I'm happy to add a "please revert this" as a core
>>> committer that is confused about how and when the new tulip-inspired
>>> incremental parsing API should be used in preference to the existing
>>> incremental parsing API, and believes this needs to be clearly
>>> resolved before adding a second way to do it
>>> (especially if there's a
>>> possibility of using a different implementation strategy that avoids
>>> adding the second way).
>> To be clear, again: anyone who wants to "see it resolved" can take over
>> the issue and handle it by themselves. I'm done with it.
> OK, I'll revert it for now, then. If someone else steps up to resolve
> the API duplication problem, cool, otherwise we can continue to live
> without this as a standard library feature.
On the other hand... because other changes have been made to the
module since the original commit, a simple "hg backout" is no longer
Stefan - if you'd like this reverted, you're going to have to either
make the alternative solution work correctly, or else craft the commit
to undo the API addition.
However, I have at least reopened http://bugs.python.org/issue17741
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
More information about the Python-Dev