Re: email libraries: use byte or unicode strings?

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:41 AM, James Y Knight <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is 3.1 in general going to allow API-breaking changes from 3.0? That's fine
> with me if it is: it does make some sense to allow a "second chance" to get
> things really right.

I don't want to answer this with a blanket yes or no, but it's close
to no. In general I've promised people that post 3.0 we'd be striving
for backwards compatibility at (at least) the same level as we did in
the 2.x range.

> But if that's not the case, wouldn't it make more sense to keep email out of
> the initial 3.0 release, rather than put a half-broken version in with
> special "we can totally change the API for the next release" dispensation?

Tough call. I'm inclined to give people *something* in 3.0 with the
promise we'll fix it in 3.1, rather than withholding it altogether.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)