Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?

Path	csiph.com!optima2.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Subject	Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?
Date	Sat, 18 Jul 2015 20:45:53 -0700
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	7
Message-ID	<87egk4zu6m.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> (permalink)
References	<moenuj$f11$1@ger.gmane.org> <moeqtn$mh0$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.693.1437269689.3674.python-list@python.org>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain
Injection-Info	mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="22184b02e80198190244f5a2dd813f11"; logging-data="22616"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Osu9bfm0Yh8NbwghUJuzD"
User-Agent	Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock	sha1:F0yGT0ZqUFzAODIOObqVetjRbdA= sha1:NmoQOMz7/ooB695i+PygEuM03HE=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.python:94088

Show key headers only | View raw

Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> writes:
> I am suggesting that if there are 10x as many 2.7only programmers as
> 3.xonly programmers, and none of the 2.7 programmers is willing to do
> the backport *of an already accepted patch*, then maybe it should not
> be done at all.

The patch acceptance/approval process is frankly daunting.

Thread

Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-18 21:34 -0400
  Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-18 20:45 -0700
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 21:04 -0700
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-19 14:52 +0100

csiph-web