R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> added the comment: Thanks for working on this.
I would prefer to have two patches: one that fixes the bug (and adds the unit tests) and a separate one for the cleanups (in a new issue). I agree that the fact that it isn't complying with the RFC makes it a bug. It seems unlikely that fixing this would break anyone's code, since if they are already working around the bug the return of a four digit year should cause their workaround code to be skipped. ---------- type: feature request -> behavior _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1194222> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
