Author pitrou
Recipients akitada, akoumjian, alex, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, davide.rizzo, eric.snow, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, giampaolo.rodola, gregory.p.smith, jacques, jaylogan, jhalcrow, jimjjewett, loewis, mark, moreati, mrabarnett, nneonneo, pitrou, r.david.murray, ronnix, rsc, sjmachin, steven.daprano, stiv, timehorse, vbr, zdwiel
Date 2011-09-01.20:16:57
SpamBayes Score 1.87692e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1314908064.3617.34.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-reply-to <1314907978.17.0.243959479844.issue2636@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> I think I need a show of hands.
> 
> Should the default be old behaviour (like re) or new behaviour? (It
> might be old now, new later.)
> 
> Should there be a NEW flag (as at present), or an OLD flag, or a
> VERSION parameter (0=old, 1=new, 2=?)?

VERSION might be best, but then it should probably be a separate
argument rather than a flag.

"old now, new later" doesn't solve the issue unless we have a careful
set of warnings to point out problematic regexes.
History
Date User Action Args
2011-09-01 20:16:57pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, loewis, georg.brandl, gregory.p.smith, jimjjewett, sjmachin, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, nneonneo, giampaolo.rodola, rsc, timehorse, mark, vbr, ezio.melotti, mrabarnett, jaylogan, akitada, moreati, steven.daprano, alex, r.david.murray, jacques, zdwiel, jhalcrow, stiv, davide.rizzo, ronnix, eric.snow, akoumjian
2011-09-01 20:16:57pitroulinkissue2636 messages
2011-09-01 20:16:57pitroucreate