Ned Deily <> added the comment:

Now that we know that this change *does* break some existing code, I think it 
is worth having that talk as mentioned in PR 5481:

"I suppose it's possible that this will break existing code, but I'd argue that 
because current behavior runs counter to the documentation and makes no sense 
given the inconsistencies, it is better to fix them. I propose this change be 
applied to 3.7 and 3.6, although if you, my friendly reviewer, disagrees about 
3.6, we can talk about it!"

The question I have is: is the problem the backport is trying to fix severe 
enough to cause package regressions in the middle of a maintenance release 
cycle?  Sure, the third-party packages should be fixed and such a change is 
fine for 3.7 but we also kinda promise that installing a maintenance release 
should be painless.  I don't know what is the right answer and I don't want to 
spend a lot of time on this but I'd like to get a bit more input on this before 
we go ahead with releasing it in 3.6.5.

nosy: +brett.cannon, ncoghlan, ned.deily
resolution: wont fix -> 
stage: resolved -> 
status: closed -> open

Python tracker <>
Python-bugs-list mailing list

Reply via email to