I assume that Paul meant 1371075 and not 131075 was accepted.

1371075 didn't do what Guido wanted at the time this patch was opened (or have documentation or unit tests), but I guess opinion has changed over time.

There is incomplete overlap between that patch and this.  This patch is really about being able to modify a configuration file 'in place', without losing the ordering or (importantly) comments.  1371075 provides the first (if you write/find an appropriate ordered dict), but not the second.

However, it seems unlikely that merely preserving comments is enough to make this change worthwhile.  I have no problem with it being rejected or being subsumed into some other patch.