[snake-farm] Re: 2.2.x backports of 2.3.x new features?

[Tim Peters]

[Laura Creighton]
> ...
> Right now the shortage is in finding people who want anything enough
> to want to do some work.  (There is no shortage of people who think
> that thing X would be great as long as somebody else does the work.)

Those may be more timeless conditions than "right now" implies <wink>.

> ...
> I think there is a compelling business case to put fixedpoint in the
> PIT,

Curiously, that one wasn't in Mike's list.  Doug Fort spun off a SourceForge
project to keep FixedPoint alive, and Guido approved the idea of folding it
into 2.3, and there it sits.  If someone cares to volunteer the work for
that, I think it would be a good idea.

> but so far I don't think there is a compelling reason for the rest.
> This is because I am completely ignorant and haven't heard any reasons
> at all, not because I am completely knowledgeable and have my mind
> made up.  So, listening to people who want things, even if they don't
> want them enough to work at making them happen is still very
> interesting to me.

Me too.  The problem is, as Jeremy said, if you listen to everyone, you'll
soon get votes for the union of all changes.  The thing is, that for every
change made so far, someone *did* care enough to do the work.

Note that a datetime module is scheduled for inclusion in Python 2.3 too.
That hasn't been visible in the Python world because it still lives in the
CVS sandbox.  I expect you'll get lots of votes for that too.