Unicode Imports

On Friday 08 September 2006 18:24, Steve Holden wrote:
> > As this can't be considered a bugfix (that I can
see), I'd be against it
> > being checked into 2.5.
>
> Are you suggesting that Python's inability to
correctly handle Unicode
> path elements isn't a bug? Or simply that this
inability isn't currently
> described in a bug report on Sourceforge?

I'm suggesting that adding the ability to handle unicode
paths is a *new* 
*feature*.

If people actually want to see 2.5 final ever released,
they're going to have 
to accept that "oh, but just this _one_ _more_
_thing_" is not going to fly.

We're _well_ past beta1, where new features should have
been added. At this 
point, we have to cut another release candidate. This is far
too much to add 
during the release candidate stage.

> I agree it's a relatively large patch for a release
candidate but if
> prudence suggests deferring it, it should be a
*definite* for 2.5.1 and
> subsequent releases.

Possibly. I remain unconvinced. 

-- 
Anthony Baxter     <anthonyinterlink.com.au>
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Devpython.org
ht
tp://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/p
ython-dev/nessto%40sharedlog.com

Anthony Baxter wrote:
> On Friday 08 September 2006 18:24, Steve Holden wrote:
> 
>>>As this can't be considered a bugfix (that I
can see), I'd be against it
>>>being checked into 2.5.
>>
>>Are you suggesting that Python's inability to
correctly handle Unicode
>>path elements isn't a bug? Or simply that this
inability isn't currently
>>described in a bug report on Sourceforge?
> 
> I'm suggesting that adding the ability to handle
unicode paths is a *new* 
> *feature*.
> 
That's certainly true.

> If people actually want to see 2.5 final ever released,
they're going to have 
> to accept that "oh, but just this _one_ _more_
_thing_" is not going to fly.
> 
> We're _well_ past beta1, where new features should
have been added. At this 
> point, we have to cut another release candidate. This
is far too much to add 
> during the release candidate stage.
> 
Right. I couldn't argue for putting this in to 2.5 - it
would certainly 
represent unwarranted feature creep at the rc2 stage.
> 
>>I agree it's a relatively large patch for a release
candidate but if
>>prudence suggests deferring it, it should be a
*definite* for 2.5.1 and
>>subsequent releases.
> 
> 
> Possibly. I remain unconvinced. 
> 

But it *is* a desirable, albeit new, feature, so I'm
surprised that you 
don't appear to perceive it as such for a downstream
release.

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden       +44 150 684 7255  +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd          http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb       http://holdenweb.blogsp
ot.com
Recent Ramblings     http://del.icio.us/st
eve.holden

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Devpython.org
ht
tp://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/p
ython-dev/nessto%40sharedlog.com