X-Received: by 10.66.149.67 with SMTP id ty3mr28709279pab.24.1437330483762; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 11:28:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.182.91.17 with SMTP id ca17mr239083obb.41.1437330483680; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 11:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Path: csiph.com!optima2.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!f3no1310igg.0!news-out.google.com!t2ni15508igk.0!nntp.google.com!pg9no2193368igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 11:28:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.196.77.157; posting-account=h3aEwQoAAACiuqX-oR3gvCVFm8lLHoWj NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.196.77.157 References: <87y4icxh4r.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87mvysxe6y.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? From: Rick Johnson Injection-Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 18:28:03 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Lines: 9 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:94147 On Sunday, July 19, 2015 at 12:55:06 PM UTC-5, Mark Lawrence wrote: > I don't think so, I know. If they want the patches that > badly and can't do it themselves they'll have to grin and > bear it, or do a bit of begging, or pay somebody to do it > for them. It's all about the effing money then? So the barriers are not a bug, but a feature? Mr. Gates would be *SO* proud!