Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?

breamoreboy at gmail.com breamoreboy at gmail.com
Sun Jul 19 22:21:44 CEST 2015


On Sunday, July 19, 2015 at 8:13:50 PM UTC+1, Rick Johnson wrote:
> On Sunday, July 19, 2015 at 1:44:25 PM UTC-5, bream... at gmail.com wrote:
> > No, it's simply that nobody can force volunteers to back
> > port something when they're just not interested in doing
> > the work, for whatever reason.  Hence my statement above,
> > of which you have focused on the last eight words.
> 
> Well i argue that the free labor *WOULD* exists *IF* the
> patching mechanism were more inclusive and intuitive.
> 

"More inclusive"?  Any man and his dog can get an account on the issue tracker?  Perhaps it isn't "intuitive", but then reading the development guide tends to help.

All in all though I have to admit that overall it's a really onerous task.  Once you've produced the patch you have to go to all the trouble of logging on to the issue tracker, finding the appropriate issue and uploading the patch.  You may even be inclined to make a comment.  In this case this entire process could take as much as two whole minutes.


More information about the Python-list mailing list