docs: state the conformance-maintained policy - #2
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
"Frozen" described an intent rather than a maintenance model, and #1 is already a divergence sitting in
mainunder it.The policy is: pin a specification tag, run the conformance suite, keep passing it. No feature work, no API surface, no npm release unless asked. A divergence from
oold-pythonis a bug here and gets fixed rather than recorded - which makes #1 in scope.The reasoning is in the section: the reason to keep a second implementation is not redundancy but that two implementations built from the same prose disagreeing usually means the prose is ambiguous, and that finding only surfaces if divergences are investigated.