[Python-Dev] please back out changeset f903cf864191 before alpha-2 (original) (raw)

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sat Aug 24 16:33:22 CEST 2013

On 25 August 2013 00:26, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

On 25 August 2013 00:13, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:

On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 00:03:01 +1000 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

If Stefan's "please revert this" as lxml.etree maintainer isn't enough, then I'm happy to add a "please revert this" as a core committer that is confused about how and when the new tulip-inspired incremental parsing API should be used in preference to the existing incremental parsing API, and believes this needs to be clearly resolved before adding a second way to do it (especially if there's a possibility of using a different implementation strategy that avoids adding the second way).

To be clear, again: anyone who wants to "see it resolved" can take over the issue and handle it by themselves. I'm done with it. OK, I'll revert it for now, then. If someone else steps up to resolve the API duplication problem, cool, otherwise we can continue to live without this as a standard library feature.

On the other hand... because other changes have been made to the module since the original commit, a simple "hg backout" is no longer possible :(

Stefan - if you'd like this reverted, you're going to have to either make the alternative solution work correctly, or else craft the commit to undo the API addition.

However, I have at least reopened http://bugs.python.org/issue17741

Regards, Nick.

-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list