On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve Holden wrote: >> >> Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> >>> It's water under the bridge now, but IMO it was too rash to *remove* >>> the old threading API from Py3k, and doubly rash to do so one day >>> before the beta release. Running up to a release (whether alpha, beta >>> or final) we should practice extra restraint, not rush to get things >>> in right before the deadline. Let's all be more careful the rest of >>> this release cycle! (I think it wasn't just Benjamin who raced to get >>> things in...) >> >> Well, it wouldn't be "adding a new feature" to reinstate the old API for >> beta two, would it, as long as we retain the new one too? It does seem that >> change was a little precipitate. > > Although if we weren't actually planning on removing the old API in 3.0, I'm > a little confused as to why we were adding Py3k warnings to it in 2.6...
It all went way too fast for anyone to think about the decision, so I suspect these two issues are directly related. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
