transformers 0.4: change in accessor function exports?

Michael Snoyman michael at
Wed May 7 09:47:01 UTC 2014

On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvr at> wrote:

> On 2014-05-07 at 00:32:33 +0200, Carter Schonwald wrote:
> > should the 0.4 release be temporarily marked deprecated so that breakages
> > stop for a wee bit?
> I know, some of you may not want to hear this, but this will only bite
> packages not following the PVP (i.e. those that didn't have upper
> bounds)... transformers-0.4 was a major version bump after all, so it
> *is* allowed to break the API (whether that was a good design decision
> is a different discussion though)
Actually, in this case, I've seen some packages that *were* following the
PVP get broken by this change, since authors didn't realize this would be a
breaking change before releasing a new version of their package with a
relaxed upper bound. You can argue about good practices in release
procedures, but I just want to make it clear that, in this case, an
immediate release of transformers 0.4.1 was incredibly helpful with
stropping wider-spread breakage.

I'd still like to come back to the question Felipe asked: why is the change
from field labels to explicit functions considered an improvement?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Libraries mailing list