Am 03.09.2013 22:59, schrieb Richard Tew:
The point that bothers me is that we've always done Stackless releases
as simply something that should work as the same version of mainline
Python, but with optional Stackless features.
To some degree it seems like we should do releases of both the evolved
Python and the normal Python both with Stackless features.
+1 for that.
Here at science+computing we will continue to use (Stackless-) Python
2.7 for several years. Therefore +1 for continuing Stackless 2.7.
But there are several caveats
- We will see a few more official releases of Python 2.7. Therefore we
can't simply increase the micro version number. On the other hand, a
Python 2.8 will cause political and technical problems. I wonder, if we
could (mis-)use the releaselevel component of the Python version number?
- How to release? Release binaries at all? Currently most of us compile
Stackless themselves.
- Compatibility and quality: the current code base of 2.7 contains many
problematic parts. If we continue to maintain 2.7 how can we avoid
regressions?
Regards
Anselm
--
Dipl. Phys. Anselm Kruis science + computing ag
Senior Solution Architect Ingolstädter Str. 22
email [email protected] 80807 München, Germany
phone +49 89 356386 874 fax 737 www.science-computing.de
--
Vorstandsvorsitzender/Chairman of the board of management:
Gerd-Lothar Leonhart
Vorstand/Board of Management:
Dr. Bernd Finkbeiner, Michael Heinrichs,
Dr. Arno Steitz, Dr. Ingrid Zech
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats/
Chairman of the Supervisory Board:
Philippe Miltin
Sitz/Registered Office: Tuebingen
Registergericht/Registration Court: Stuttgart
Registernummer/Commercial Register No.: HRB 382196
_______________________________________________
Stackless mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
