Author gvanrossum
Recipients Martin.Teichmann, eric.snow, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, ned.deily
Date 2016-09-10.16:42:22
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <CAP7+vJ+QXE1_rL4+k5msRszVEUq+Cdny3+dZhH5Zn=HkuKTBDQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1473504821.18.0.130119082848.issue23722@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> That aspect of the change is clearly a bug fix

I am happy to *rule* that we can treat it as a bugfix, but I disagree
that it's *clearly* a bugfix. It's definitely debatable. This area of
the language is so obscure and so few people remember why it was done
the way that it's done that I expect that someone out there will be
unhappy about the change. But... change happens, so it's okay.

(Please don't respond arguing the "clearly" part, just go ahead and do it. :-)
History
Date User Action Args
2016-09-10 16:42:22gvanrossumsetrecipients: + gvanrossum, ncoghlan, ned.deily, eric.snow, Martin.Teichmann
2016-09-10 16:42:22gvanrossumlinkissue23722 messages
2016-09-10 16:42:22gvanrossumcreate