Message143641
> I figured that since xmlrpclib has its own version it should be meaningful.
That was most probably the intent of the attribute, but it seems to have become unmaintained. In any case, a change could not be done in a 2.7 bugfix release. Maybe it’s worth changing it in 3.3, or it could just be removed.
BTW:
> The 2.7 xmlrpclib is not completely backward compatible with that in 2.6
Do you mean that your code relied on bugs or undocumented behavior, or that you’ve found regressions? If it’s the later, please report bugs. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2011-09-06 18:05:58 | eric.araujo | set | recipients:
+ eric.araujo, georg.brandl, benjamin.peterson, rcritten |
2011-09-06 18:05:58 | eric.araujo | set | messageid: <1315332358.89.0.039392573748.issue12912@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2011-09-06 18:05:57 | eric.araujo | link | issue12912 messages |
2011-09-06 18:05:57 | eric.araujo | create | |
|