➜

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 xiang.zhang
Recipients belopolsky, bozo.kopic, ghaering, lemburg, serhiy.storchaka, xiang.zhang
Date 2017-01-11.16:04:29
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1484150669.73.0.569277648635.issue29099@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content 
I asked whether this should be treated as an enhancement or bug fix. Now with your concerns I think it fits as enhancement more.

> Is it possible to make the support optional for 3.5 and 3.6 and only enable it for 3.7 (with the possibility of disabling it again) ?

How about just make it just into 3.7 and just document only naive datetime objects are supported in 3.5, 3.6 and 2.7.
I am not sure it's worth to make it even optional in 3.7. Discarding tzinfo sounds weird, and worse, the behaviour is not deterministic, it could also fail with an exception.
History
Date User Action Args
2017-01-11 16:04:29xiang.zhangsetrecipients: + xiang.zhang, lemburg, ghaering, belopolsky, serhiy.storchaka, bozo.kopic
2017-01-11 16:04:29xiang.zhangsetmessageid: <1484150669.73.0.569277648635.issue29099@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-01-11 16:04:29xiang.zhanglinkissue29099 messages
2017-01-11 16:04:29xiang.zhangcreate