Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?
breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk
Sun Jul 19 19:54:28 CEST 2015
On 19/07/2015 18:14, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> On Sunday 19 Jul 2015 18:38 CEST, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> On 19/07/2015 17:10, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>>> On Sunday 19 Jul 2015 15:42 CEST, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>>> On 19/07/2015 03:13, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2015 7:50 PM, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
>>>>>> to 2.7, surely bug fixes are also allowed?
>>>>> Of course, allowed. But should they be made, and if so, by who?
>>>> The people who want the fixes.
>>> Babies want clean diapers. So babies have to change diapers
>> That has to be the worst analogy I've ever read. We are discussing
>> backporting working patches, *NOT* having to go through the whole
>> shooting match from scratch.
> You think so? I think that a lot of people who are using 2.7 would
> like to have the fixes. They know how to use Python, but they would
> not now how to implement a patch. That is why I made this comment.
I don't think so, I know. If they want the patches that badly and can't
do it themselves they'll have to grin and bear it, or do a bit of
begging, or pay somebody to do it for them. Unless the PSF or another
body does the paying, something which I vaguely recall hearing about.
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
More information about the Python-list