Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'python,': 0.02; 'fixes': 0.05; 'from:addr:yahoo.co.uk': 0.05; '*not*': 0.07; 'allowed.': 0.07; 'badly': 0.07; 'so?': 0.07; 'patch.': 0.09; 'patches': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:2.7': 0.09; 'bug': 0.10; 'psf': 0.12; '2.7': 0.13; 'read.': 0.13; 'fixes.': 0.16; 'made,': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'reedy': 0.16; 'shooting': 0.16; 'subject:non': 0.16; 'who?': 0.16; 'worst': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'language': 0.19; '>>>': 0.20; '2015': 0.20; 'lawrence': 0.22; 'bit': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.26; 'about.': 0.29; "they'll": 0.29; 'themselves': 0.29; 'somebody': 0.30; 'another': 0.32; "can't": 0.32; 'implement': 0.32; 'language.': 0.32; 'surely': 0.33; 'know.': 0.34; 'so,': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'received:org': 0.37; 'why': 0.39; 'does': 0.39; 'subject:-': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'mark': 0.40; 'ever': 0.60; 'body': 0.61; 'our': 0.64; '>>>>>': 0.66; 'hearing': 0.67; 'jul': 0.72; 'sunday': 0.72; 'cecil': 0.84; 'pythonistas,': 0.84; 'westerhof': 0.84; 'comment.': 0.91 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Mark Lawrence Subject: Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 18:54:28 +0100 References: <87y4icxh4r.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87mvysxe6y.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-78-147-20-184.as13285.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 In-Reply-To: <87mvysxe6y.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 38 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1437328495 news.xs4all.nl 2965 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:46148 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:94141 On 19/07/2015 18:14, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > On Sunday 19 Jul 2015 18:38 CEST, Mark Lawrence wrote: > >> On 19/07/2015 17:10, Cecil Westerhof wrote: >>> On Sunday 19 Jul 2015 15:42 CEST, Mark Lawrence wrote: >>> >>>> On 19/07/2015 03:13, Terry Reedy wrote: >>>>> On 7/18/2015 7:50 PM, Devin Jeanpierre wrote: >>>>>> to 2.7, surely bug fixes are also allowed? >>>>> >>>>> Of course, allowed. But should they be made, and if so, by who? >>>> >>>> The people who want the fixes. >>> >>> Babies want clean diapers. So babies have to change diapers >>> themselves? >>> >> >> That has to be the worst analogy I've ever read. We are discussing >> backporting working patches, *NOT* having to go through the whole >> shooting match from scratch. > > You think so? I think that a lot of people who are using 2.7 would > like to have the fixes. They know how to use Python, but they would > not now how to implement a patch. That is why I made this comment. > 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. Unless the PSF or another body does the paying, something which I vaguely recall hearing about. -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence