Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?

Mark Lawrence breamoreboy at
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
>>> themselves?
>> 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.

Mark Lawrence

More information about the Python-list mailing list