On 8 July 2015 at 05:12, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > On Jul 07, 2015, at 02:53 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > >>To me, the main question is whether you are sure that your proposal is the >>right fix, or whether you might reasonably do something different (with the >>new arguments) if changes were reverted for the present and you two took more >>time to think about the problem. My impression is that the latter is >>unlikely because the problem is inherent in the new auth methods. > > I generally like the approach that initially added with issue #15014. This is > a subtle corner of the RFC and an unexpected regression from Python 3.4.
That strikes me as just the kind of not-quite-as-finished-as-we-thought case that the beta cycle is designed to flush out, so the minor further enhancement sounds like a good idea to me. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
