[rfc] [patch] pycurl transport

[Robert Collins]

On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 16:27 +1100, Martin Pool wrote:
> 
> This is, by the way, an interesting case for the API stability promise
> discussed a little while ago.  If we really strictly meant to keep
> external API stability, then we shouldn't remove this parameter even
> though it does nothing: it's just possible there's external code which
> does pass decode=False and will be broken.
> 
> So I'm not sure.  Maybe there is some room for discretion or maybe
> even small changes like this should go through a deprecation phase in
> the future. 

In general, yes they should. but: code that did this would have to be
very specific - specific enough I would not expect it to exist:
 * http only
 * using a parameter not present or accepted by other transports.

Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060112/189bdc60/attachment.pgp