On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 09:06:15PM -0800, Brett Cannon wrote: > If people start taking the carrots we have added to 3.x and > backporting them to keep the 2.x series alive you are essentially > making the 3.x DOA by negating its benefits which I personally > don't agree with.
I think we have got to the heart of our disagreement. Assume that some superhuman takes all the backwards compatible goodies from 3.x and merges them into 2.x. If that really would kill off Python 3 then I would proclaim it a project that deserved to die. Why should the backwards incompatible changes be endured if they cannot justify their existance by the benefit they provide? I guess I have more confidence in Python 3 than you do. I don't see why Python 2.x needs to be artificially limited so that Python 3 can benefit. Regards, Neil _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
