This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author ezio.melotti
Recipients eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, nailor, petri.lehtinen, sandro.tosi, terry.reedy
Date 2011-10-19.22:59:05
SpamBayes Score 2.8988656e-10
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1319065146.88.0.56003774308.issue12296@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I don't think we need to mention that.  Actually the tone of the whole paragraph could be relaxed a bit, because it first says that "any change **will** break code" (which is not true), except "new semantic, obviously" (which is not true either).

The whole sentence could also be dropped altogether IMHO.
"""
Basically just put yourself in the shoes of someone whose code will be broken by a change to pre-existing semantics.
"""
is already clear enough, and it could be rephrased to
"""
Basically just put yourself in the shoes of someone whose code will be broken by the change(s) introduced by the patch.
"""
to avoid talking about 'semantics'.
History
Date User Action Args
2011-10-19 22:59:07ezio.melottisetrecipients: + ezio.melotti, terry.reedy, eric.araujo, sandro.tosi, nailor, petri.lehtinen
2011-10-19 22:59:06ezio.melottisetmessageid: <1319065146.88.0.56003774308.issue12296@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2011-10-19 22:59:06ezio.melottilinkissue12296 messages
2011-10-19 22:59:05ezio.melotticreate