Alexander Belopolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: While technically this is an API change, in reality it is unlikely to break anyone's code because you can always pass char * to a function that expects const char* and the ABI does not change. (Also I cannot think why anyone would want to use pointers to the affected functions, which would be another potential breakage.)
In any case, I am not a big proponent of const correctness, but this patch was forgotten for 1.5 years and deferring it to 2.7 and 3.1 is virtually equivalent to closing with "won't fix". Is it clear that this patch is not a candidate for minor releases - 2.5.3 or 2.6.1? As I explained, it is not *really* an API change. If it is a backport candidate, I would see benefit in committing it sooner and blocking in py3k merge until 3.0 is out. On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: > > Sorry, but it's too late to apply the patch. The issues don't count as > "critical" and it changes the API, too. Only critical and important bugs > are solved during the release candidate phase of 3.0. Python 2.6 is > already out. > > I set the target version to 2.7 and 3.1. > > ---------- > stage: -> patch review > versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.1 -Python 2.6 > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue1699259> > _______________________________________ > _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1699259> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
