Author ncoghlan
Recipients Alexander.Belopolsky, Amber.Yust, Andreas.Pelme, BreamoreBoy, Hanxue.Lee, Lakin.Wecker, alex, belopolsky, cvrebert, dstufft, ethan.furman, georg.brandl, gwrtheyrn, lemburg, mark.dickinson, merwok, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, shai, skip.montanaro, tim.peters, westley.martinez, yselivanov
Date 2014-03-08.04:39:01
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1394253542.17.0.437046969153.issue13936@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Mark, we kinda proved we're willing to break backwards compatibility in the name of improving usability when we embarked down the path of creating Python 3 and an associated transition plan from Python 2, rather than just continuing to develop Python 2.

Compared to some of the backwards compatibility breaks within the Python 2 series that were handled using the normal deprecating cycle (removing string exceptions, anyone?), this one would be truly trivial.
History
Date User Action Args
2014-03-08 04:39:02ncoghlansetrecipients: + ncoghlan, lemburg, tim.peters, skip.montanaro, georg.brandl, mark.dickinson, belopolsky, pitrou, merwok, alex, r.david.murray, cvrebert, Alexander.Belopolsky, BreamoreBoy, ethan.furman, westley.martinez, gwrtheyrn, Lakin.Wecker, yselivanov, shai, dstufft, Andreas.Pelme, Amber.Yust, Hanxue.Lee
2014-03-08 04:39:02ncoghlansetmessageid: <1394253542.17.0.437046969153.issue13936@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2014-03-08 04:39:02ncoghlanlinkissue13936 messages
2014-03-08 04:39:01ncoghlancreate