ISTM, the only value added by next(g) is that it replaces g.next() with 
a more conventional spelling, g.__next__().  Since 2.6 still has g.next
(),I don't see how this backport adds value.  It does however create a 
second way to do it that will be confusing to some remaining in the 2.x 
world.  I think we should avoid double spellings in 2.6 except in cases 
where the 2-to-3 converter would need help.