On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > On 1/20/2012 2:51 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > >> I think the counting collision is at best a bandaid and not a proper fix >> stemmed from a desire to not break existing applications on a bugfix >> release ... > > My opinion of counting is better than yours, but even conceding the > theoretical, purity argument, our release process is practical as well. > There have been a few occasions when fixes to bugs in our code have been > delayed from a bugfix release to the next feature release -- because the fix > would break too much code depending on the bug.
AFAICT Brett's suggestion (which had occurred to me as well, but I'm not a core developer by any stretch) seemed to get lost in the debate: would it be possible to go with collision counting for bugfix releases and hash randomization for new feature releases? (Brett made it here: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-January/115740.html>.) -- Ben Wolfson "Human kind has used its intelligence to vary the flavour of drinks, which may be sweet, aromatic, fermented or spirit-based. ... Family and social life also offer numerous other occasions to consume drinks for pleasure." [Larousse, "Drink" entry] _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
