[Python-Dev] Is adding support for os.PathLike an enhancement or bugfix?

Koos Zevenhoven k7hoven at gmail.com
Thu May 4 10:43:14 EDT 2017


On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 4:19 AM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:
> On 5/3/2017 7:13 PM, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
>>
[...]

>> Shutil was among the most important to be updated, IMO.
>>
>> I had made some sort of list of affected modules elsewhere [1]:
>> ntpath, posixpath, os.scandir, os.[other stuff], DirEntry (tempted to
>> say os.DirEntry, but that is
>> not true), shutil.[stuff], (io.)open, fileinput, filecmp, zipfile,
>> tarfile, tempfile (for the 'dir' keyword arguments), maybe even glob
>> and fnmatch (are the patterns paths?)
>
>
> What did not get done for 3.6 should be proposed for 3.7.
>

Anyone, feel free. The nightmare part is done, so this could be a case
where a PR actually pays off in terms of being able to use the
feature. There's no need for any unnecessary masochism (should there
ever be?).

[...]
>
> Enhancing public APIs in normal (non-provisional) modules in bugfix releases
> has turned out to be a bad thing to do.  Hence the policy to not do that.
> The few exceptions have been necessary to fix a bug that needed to be fixed,
> and could not reasonably be fixed otherwise.

Such exceptions can of course more easily be made when the adoption of
a version is still small, and almost all users will never see X.Y.0 or
X.Y.1. The fraction of 3.6 users is probably super tiny right now, and
even those users are likely to eagerly update to bugfix releases. For
instance, are there any major (LTS?) linux distros that already come
with 3.6.0 or 3.6.1? Well OK, 3.6.2 may be too late for some.

—Koos


-- 
+ Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list