> On May 27, 2016, at 06:31, Adi Roiban <a...@roiban.ro> wrote: > > > > On 27 May 2016 at 13:13, Itamar Turner-Trauring <ita...@itamarst.org > <mailto:ita...@itamarst.org>> wrote: > > > [snip] > > I think they're fine to accept insofar as: > > 1. There is strong ongoing momentum for the port now, so these changes makes > porting module-by-module easier and won't just bitrot. > > How do you define a "strong ongoing momentum" ?
I don't think "momentum" is a real thing. Investment in Twisted has historically followed an extreme boom/bust cycle, and we don't want to make any decisions assuming that work will be continuing at the current rate. > 2. They're doing one particular incompatibility at a time, rather than > "here's an assortment of random changes to a module that may or may not port > that module fully, who knows." > > > Some code parts don't have python 2.7 coverage . > Is is still acceptable to touch that code ? :) No. Test coverage is how we know that the behavior is the same on both versions of Python and we're not just hoping that it is. -glyph
_______________________________________________ Twisted-Python mailing list Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python
