[Python-Dev] provisional status for asyncio
Yury Selivanov
yselivanov.ml at gmail.com
Fri Aug 28 01:00:26 CEST 2015
Brett,
On 2015-08-27 6:46 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
[...]
> I say it's either fully provisional or it's not. I'm fine with
> extending its provisional status another feature release as long as it
> clearly states that in What's New for 3.5, but I don't think this
> granularity guarantee of not breaking APIs while adding new features
> is worth it. What if you want to add a new feature that is really hard
> to do right without breaking compatibility? We all know how trying
> that is. If you truly want to keep an accelerated development cycle,
> then short of releasing new stdlib versions every 6 months separate
> from the language then I say keep it provisional for 3.5.
I'm fine with keeping it provisional in 3.5 (and Guido suggests this
idea too in this thread).
A lot of companies (including big ones) are using asyncio already,
despite the fact that it's provisional in 3.4. I seriously doubt that
keeping it provisional in 3.5 will do any harm.
asyncio documentation in 3.4.x has the following notes section:
Note: The asyncio package has been included in the
standard library on a provisional basis. Backwards
incompatible changes (up to and including removal
of the module) may occur if deemed necessary by the
core developers.
I suggest to add a slightly less strong-worded note to 3.5 documentation:
Note: The asyncio package has been included in the
standard library on a provisional basis. Backwards
incompatible changes may occur if deemed absolutely
necessary by the core developers.
Yury
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list