[Python-Dev] Update xml.etree.ElementTree for Python 2.7 and 3.2

[Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven]

-On [20100220 22:47], "Martin v. Löwis" (martin at v.loewis.de) wrote:
>In general, that's the assumption, and Guido has stated that he dislikes
>exceptions. However, Fredrik's code was included only under the
>exception. ElementTree wouldn't be part of the standard library if an
>exception had not been made.

I was not fully aware of that bit of history, my thanks for enlightening me
on it.

>If users and co-developers think that these issues absolutely must be
>resolved now (rather than waiting some more), I see only two options:
>a) ElementTree is removed from the library
>b) we declare that we fork ElementTree, and designate a maintainer.
>
>Just fixing the bugs without designating a maintainer is *not* an
>option, because we absolutely need somebody to pronounce on changes. It
>will not be Guido, and if it is not Fredrik, somebody else must step
>forward. I would then ask that person, as the first thing, to rename the
>package when making incompatible changes.

Call me a sceptic or pragmatist, but I don't see the situation change
suddenly from what it has been for the past couple of years. I vaguely
remember running into problems or limitations myself with ElementTree and
switching to lxml at one point.

It sort of has to escalate now in order to get the maintainer to look at it
and I doubt that's how we want to keep operating in the future? So the
choice of removal or forking may actually be quite imminent, but of course,
that's my interpretation of things.

>Well, I promised that we will stick to the procedure when integrating
>ElementTree. I'm not willing to break this promise.

Honourable and I can understand that. Although it doesn't make it flexible
to work on.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
The fragrance always stays in the hand that gives the rose...