[Python-Dev] provisional status for asyncio
brett at python.org
Thu Aug 27 23:53:57 CEST 2015
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 at 14:39 Yury Selivanov <yselivanov.ml at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2015-08-27 5:31 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
> > On 2015-08-27 5:24 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >> My proposal is to amend PEP 411 with two levels of provisional
> >> packages:
> >> Level 1: Backwards incompatible changes might be introduced in point
> >> releases.
> >> Level 2: Only backwards compatible changes can be introduced in
> >> new point
> >> releases.
> >> How is this any different from the normal compatibility promise we
> >> have for any non-provisional code in the stdlib?
> >> And by point release I assume you mean a new minor release, e.g. 3.5
> >> -> 3.6.
> > Right, my mistake, I indeed meant minor releases.
> > The difference is that right now we don't introduce new features
> > (regardless of backwards compatibility promises) for any
> > non-provisional code in minor releases, we can only do bug fixes.
> > My proposal is to enable asyncio receiving new strictly backwards
> > compatible APIs/features (and bug fixes too, of course) in minor
> > releases (3.5.x).
> Turns out I was lost in terminology :)
> Considering that Python versioning is defined as major.minor.micro, I'll
> rephrase the proposal:
> Level 1: Backwards incompatible changes might be introduced in new
> Python releases (including micro releases)
> Level 2: Only backwards compatible changes (new APIs including) can be
> introduced in micro releases.
In that case I don't think it's a good idea for something that has
widespread use to get new APIs in a micro release; I lived the
2.2.1/boolean event and I don't want to go through that again. If a module
is used enough to warrant not breaking backwards-compatibility then it
warrants not being provisional and being like any other module.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev