On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 1:54 PM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Don't think of this as a failure. Think of it as an opportunity: we've
> identified a weakness in our deprecation process. Let's fix that
> process, make sure that *developers* will see the warning in 3.8 or 3.9,
> and not raise an exception until 4.0 or 4.1.
>

So HOW are you going to make sure developers see it? Currently it
requires some extra steps or flags, which are not well known. What
change are you proposing for 3.8 that will ensure that this actually
gets solved? Otherwise, all you're doing is saying "I wish this
problem would just go away".

Library authors can start _right now_ fixing their code so it's more
3.8 compatible. ("More" because 3.8 doesn't actually break anything.)
What is actually gained by waiting longer, and how do you propose to
make this transition easier?

ChrisA
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/UGDPMFKXJRU2CPKPAI5NLHDNH3VG6BWN/

Reply via email to