Message138989
| Author |
r.david.murray |
| Recipients |
r.david.murray, ssbarnea, terry.reedy |
| Date |
2011年06月24日.21:41:59 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.0001097149 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1308951720.3.0.622136296009.issue12398@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Many applications and libraries say "Python X.Y or newer", and it is one of the strengths of Python that this will often be true. That's what our backward compatibility policy is about, and that's why the fact that it isn't true for 2.x->3.x is such a big deal. As far as I can see there was no deprecation involved here, so "announced" is not a factor, I think. We won't be sure until we know what changed.
All that said, it is quite possible (even likely, given #11898) that the pyamf code contains a bug and only worked by accident, and is now failing because some other bug in Python was fixed. Again, we won't know until we have a complete diagnosis of the cause of the change in behavior. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2011年06月24日 21:42:00 | r.david.murray | set | recipients:
+ r.david.murray, terry.reedy, ssbarnea |
| 2011年06月24日 21:42:00 | r.david.murray | set | messageid: <1308951720.3.0.622136296009.issue12398@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2011年06月24日 21:41:59 | r.david.murray | link | issue12398 messages |
| 2011年06月24日 21:41:59 | r.david.murray | create |
|