Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #94183
| Return-Path | <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| 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; 'context': 0.05; 'fixes': 0.05; 'guido': 0.05; 'rejected': 0.05; 'allowed.': 0.07; 'dev': 0.07; 'imply': 0.07; 'redirected': 0.07; 'rewrite': 0.07; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.09; 'accepted,': 0.09; 'behavior,': 0.09; 'boring': 0.09; 'grep': 0.09; 'posting.': 0.09; 'subject:2.7': 0.09; 'themselves,': 0.09; 'thrown': 0.09; 'bug': 0.10; 'thread': 0.10; 'python': 0.10; '2.7': 0.13; 'value.': 0.15; '"right"': 0.16; '(informally)': 0.16; 'committers': 0.16; 'devs': 0.16; 'discussion?': 0.16; 'fix,': 0.16; 'really?': 0.16; 'rough': 0.16; 'subject:non': 0.16; 'to:addr:pearwood.info': 0.16; "to:name:steven d'aprano": 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'app': 0.16; 'contribute': 0.16; 'debugging': 0.18; "shouldn't": 0.18; ';-)': 0.18; '2015': 0.20; 'cc:2**0': 0.20; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.20; 'fix': 0.21; 'meant': 0.22; '2.x': 0.22; "aren't": 0.22; 'fixing': 0.22; 'seems': 0.23; 'needed.': 0.23; 'sat,': 0.23; 'this:': 0.23; 'patch': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'all.': 0.24; 'feature': 0.24; 'url:bugs': 0.24; 'bugs': 0.27; 'comfortable': 0.27; 'question': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'specifically': 0.28; 'idea': 0.28; 'towards': 0.28; 'argue': 0.29; 'implied': 0.29; "i'm": 0.30; 'too.': 0.30; 'becomes': 0.30; 'e.g.': 0.30; 'probably': 0.31; 'option': 0.31; 'everyone': 0.31; 'core': 0.32; 'though,': 0.32; 'maybe': 0.33; 'point': 0.33; 'changed': 0.33; 'url:python': 0.33; "d'aprano": 0.33; 'doubt': 0.33; 'quotes': 0.33; 'steven': 0.33; 'that,': 0.34; 'gets': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'best,': 0.35; 'quite': 0.35; 'submitting': 0.35; 'should': 0.36; 'instead': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'really': 0.37; 'being': 0.37; 'say': 0.37; 'anything': 0.38; 'end': 0.39; 'goes': 0.39; 'sure': 0.39; 'format': 0.39; 'subject:-': 0.39; 'where': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'your': 0.60; 'close': 0.61; 'black': 0.61; 'leaving': 0.63; 'day.': 0.63; 'you.': 0.64; 'face': 0.64; 'believe': 0.66; 'here': 0.66; 'spend': 0.67; 'choose': 0.68; 'frustrated': 0.72; 'jul': 0.72; '9:45': 0.84; 'citation': 0.84; 'forbidden.': 0.84; 'hostile': 0.84; 'white.': 0.84; 'attitude': 0.91; 'obvious,': 0.91; 'suffer': 0.93 |
| DKIM-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=ytEjg5FzEo1jeD0fbDsaJvV7SunNrR30Q14ybGStvA0=; b=CLWPNOP7kTNYFvn4Dx9UvGyUqIFtwp1+IeD1Yja3Z6r/ilx3PDgL4RoFWjfCId8ys7 pySPv7l9ku/gkBIvgVzu6Nk2HY7/4q0mptEkMPfWg2+qAeOmoChYIfPlf13612uKN5qK 5qxK8kgZ176u7gjkikSt7J6syLa4kocDfgTaGCV+gftmsaKxQQyC/5khR8w1v45jrteH xcuS4eHHHNSxx68kzDpeXfh4gm5M9Z4pUZSwrU3HIfc3oxGY6S/tOCAIRVIGewiGy1oi pr2o7/8tr4oOzNwC39F4Or4CIWbybM1m6QDCvaSheSWSrij5Hsa7KdyC2S6q2P++vR41 TQ6g== |
| X-Received | by 10.194.172.130 with SMTP id bc2mr55079913wjc.85.1437355284862; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 18:21:24 -0700 (PDT) |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| In-Reply-To | <55ab2b73$0$1664$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| References | <moenuj$f11$1@ger.gmane.org> <moeqtn$mh0$1@ger.gmane.org> <moeurf$a6f$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.695.1437273248.3674.python-list@python.org> <55ab2b73$0$1664$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| From | Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> |
| Date | Sun, 19 Jul 2015 18:20:45 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? |
| To | "Steven D'Aprano" <steve@pearwood.info> |
| Cc | "comp.lang.python" <python-list@python.org> |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
| X-BeenThere | python-list@python.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.20+ |
| Precedence | list |
| List-Id | General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/> |
| List-Post | <mailto:python-list@python.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.754.1437355286.3674.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| Lines | 72 |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 2001:888:2000:d::a6 |
| X-Trace | 1437355286 news.xs4all.nl 2834 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:35226 |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@xs4all.nl |
| X-Received-Bytes | 7752 |
| X-Received-Body-CRC | 742888947 |
| Path | csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.stben.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!bcyclone04.am1.xlned.com!bcyclone04.am1.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.python:94183 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote: >> It gets really boring submitting 2.7-specific patches, though, when >> they aren't accepted, and the committers have such a hostile attitude >> towards it. I was told by core devs that, instead of fixing bugs in >> Python 2, I should just rewrite my app in Python 3. > > Really? Can you point us to this discussion? Yes, really. It was on #python-dev IRC. > If you are right, and that was an official pronouncement, then it seems that > non-security bug fixes to 2.7 are forbidden. I never said it was a pronouncement, or official. It wasn't. I have no idea where you got that idea from, given that I specifically have said that I think non-security bug fixes are allowed. > I suspect though that it's not quite that black and white. Perhaps there was > some doubt about whether or not the patch in question was fixing a bug or > adding a feature (a behavioural change). Or the core dev in question was > speaking for themselves, not for all. They weren't speaking for all. And, I never said they were. Nor did I imply that they were. Search your logs for https://bugs.python.org/issue17094 and http://bugs.python.org/issue5315 I was most frustrated by the first case -- the patch was (informally) rejected in favor of the "right" fix, and the "right" fix was (informally) rejected because it changed behavior, leaving me only with the option of absurd workarounds of a bug in Python, or moving to python 3. >> It has even been >> implied that bugs in Python 2 are *good*, because that might help with >> Python 3 adoption. > > Really? Can you point us to this discussion? > > As they say on Wikipedia, Citation Needed. I would like to see the context > before taking that at face value. Of course, it was a joke. The format of the joke goes like this: people spend a lot of time debugging and writing bugfixes for Python 2.7, and you say: <dev2> guido wants all python 3 features in python 2, so ssbr` maybe choose the right time to ask a backport ;-) <dev1> oh. if i would be paid to contribute to cpython, i would probably be ok to backport anything from python 3 to python 2 <dev1> since i'm not paid for that, i will to kill python 2, it must suffer a lot And that's about as close to logs as I am comfortable posting. Grep your logs for that, too. I don't like how this is being redirected to "surely you misunderstood" or "I don't believe you". The fact that some core devs are hostile to 2.x development is really bleedingly obvious, you shouldn't need quotes or context thrown at you. The rhetoric almost always shies _just_ short of ceasing bugfixes (until 2020, when that abruptly becomes a cracking good idea). e.g. in "2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste". I don't want to argue over who said what. I am sure everyone meant the best, and I misunderstood them given a complicated context and a rough day. Let's end this thread here, please. -- Devin
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 19:33 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 19:49 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 20:52 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 21:18 -0700
Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-19 14:45 +1000
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 15:06 +1000
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-19 10:16 +0300
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 00:32 -0700
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-19 10:44 +0300
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 19:13 -0400
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 19:02 -0700
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Anuradha Laxminarayan <lanuradha@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 23:25 -0700
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 04:26 -0400
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-07-19 07:56 -0500
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 04:07 +1000
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-07-19 14:55 -0500
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 07:16 +1000
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-07-20 00:43 -0700
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-07-19 23:13 +0100
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:30 -0700
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 13:43 +1000
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 23:11 -0700
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-21 10:10 +0200
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-21 12:10 +0300
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 19:18 +1000
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-21 13:13 +0300
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-21 11:34 +0100
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-21 20:39 +1000
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-21 13:54 +0300
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-08-09 00:27 +0300
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-09 09:29 -0700
Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 06:34 -0700
OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 02:58 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-22 19:17 +0200
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 10:49 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-22 20:14 +0200
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-22 21:59 +0100
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 03:21 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-22 21:44 -0400
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 12:00 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 10:48 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 10:51 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 15:14 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 11:09 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 15:41 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-23 23:59 +0300
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 07:03 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-24 00:29 +0300
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-23 22:50 +0100
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-23 23:52 +0200
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-24 00:59 +0300
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 08:02 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 08:00 +1000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-07-23 23:01 +0100
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-24 00:19 +0200
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-23 23:56 +0100
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-24 00:07 +0000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 18:40 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-23 19:03 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 20:16 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-24 14:13 +0000
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-24 08:45 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-24 16:58 +0100
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 22:15 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-07-23 18:57 +1200
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 02:12 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 05:52 -0700
Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-23 11:24 +0300
Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-21 18:57 +1000
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 02:44 -0400
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 05:11 -0400
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 07:30 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-19 15:00 +0100
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-19 14:45 +1000
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 18:20 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-20 13:05 +1000
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 20:41 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-20 02:46 +0100
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 19:16 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 12:59 +1000
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-20 11:59 +0100
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:04 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:15 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 13:33 +1000
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-21 00:45 -0400
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? breamoreboy@gmail.com - 2015-07-21 14:22 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 19:07 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-22 02:51 -0400
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 16:37 -0700
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-20 02:25 -0400
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? dieter <dieter@handshake.de> - 2015-07-20 08:58 +0200
Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 00:13 -0700
csiph-web