Hi Jeroen, On 2012-10-15, Jeroen Demeyer <jdeme...@cage.ugent.be> wrote: > But > #9265 does exactly that: it removes some old pickles because they failed > to unpickle in the new version. Since I don't know much about the > pickle jar, I don't have an opinion on this. But if there is objection > on #9265, it will need to be fixed.
I believe that backwards compatibility is important. One might *perhaps* accept that pickles created with Sage-2.x would become partially uneatable with Sage-5.4. But the comments on #9265 seem to say that some pickles created with Sage-5.3 would become uneatable with Sage-5.4 (or whatever version #9265 will be merged). I don't think that would be a good idea. How do the failing pickles look like? Are they pickled by "name of the class plus content of __dict__" (AFAIK that's the default in Python)? Or by "name of the class plus __init__ arguments plus data for __setstate__"? Or by some separate unpickling function plus arguments, returned by some "__reduce__" method? In all cases, there should be ways to keep old data legible, resp. to automatically transform an old data format into a new one. Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
