Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?

References	<moenuj$f11$1@ger.gmane.org> <moeqtn$mh0$1@ger.gmane.org> <moeurf$a6f$1@ger.gmane.org>
From	Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-18 19:33 -0700
Subject	Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.695.1437273248.3674.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
> On 7/18/2015 8:27 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> On 19/07/2015 00:36, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> Programmers don't much like doing maintainance work when they're paid to
>> do it, so why would they volunteer to do it?
>
> Right.  So I am asking: if a 3.x user volunteers a 3.x patch and a 3.x core
> developer reviews and edits the patch until it is ready to commit, why
> should either of them volunteer to do a 2.7 backport that they will not use?

Because it helps even more people. The reason people make upstream
contributions is so that the world benefits. If you only wanted to
help yourself, you'd just patch CPython locally, and not bother
contributing anything upstream.

> 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.

That just isn't true. I have backported 3.x patches. Other people have
backported entire modules.

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. It has even been
implied that bugs in Python 2 are *good*, because that might help with
Python 3 adoption.

>> Then even if you do the
>> work to fix *ANY* bug there is no guarantee that it gets committed.
>
> I am discussing the situation where there *is* a near guarantee (if the
> backport works and does not break anything and has not been so heavily
> revised as to require a separate review).

That is not how I have experienced contribution to CPython. No, the
patches are *not* guaranteed, and in my experience they are not likely
to be accepted.

If the issue was closed as fixed before I contributed the backported
patch, does anyone even see it?

-- Devin

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

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