[stdlib-sig] standardizing the deprecation policy (and hownoisy they are)

geremy condra debatem1 at gmail.com
Tue Nov 10 15:50:30 CET 2009

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Ned Deily <nad at acm.org> wrote:
> In article
> <f3cc57c60911091514i43f67896q489adca0585bc460 at mail.gmail.com>,
>  geremy condra <debatem1 at gmail.com>
>  wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Raymond Hettinger
>> <python at rcn.com> wrote:
>> > Nice summary.  FWIW, I concur with Brett.  No one needs to see
>> > warnings/deprecations except for the developer who controls the code.
>> > Even that developer may only need to see it at one point during the
>> > development process.  Further, the developer controlling the code
>> > just may not care -- the script can be for single use, for a class project,
>> > or some other purpose that doesn't require being notified of what may
>> > change in a later version of Python.
> +1
>> If they don't care, why does it matter whether they see it or not?
>> Seems like an argument for the status quo.
> Because, as it stands in the case of third-party packages, the
> deprecation warnings target the wrong audience, the end-users.  At best
> the status quo behavior is a constant annoyance and, at worst,
> encourages end users to learn to ignore them, even in cases where it
> might eventually matter in their own code.

Ok, so whats wrong with just saying

import warnings

and walking away?

Geremy Condra

More information about the stdlib-sig mailing list