It does no harm to leave 3.2 around, I think.  If it were time to
close it, you wouldn't need to ask.

If our 3.4 is really cpython's default, then we should rename it for
consistency.

Cheers,
Richard.

On 1/6/14, Kristján Valur Jónsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Should we close off the 3.2-slp branch?
> It looks like a very dead horse, even though merging from 3.2-slp to 3.3-slp
> is the single most effortless part of stackless branch management :)
>
> I would also suggest that we create a "default-slp" branch, to mirror the
> current "default".  Essentially, rename what 3.4-slp branch there exists out
> there
> as "default-slp" for consistency with the non-slp tree.
> K
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:stackless-
>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Tew
>> Sent: 5. janúar 2014 22:25
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: [Stackless] Upcoming Stackless releases
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been reflecting on the 2.7.6 and 3.3.3 releases of Stackless, and how
>> I
>> think it's important we do them in a timely fashion.
>>
>> However, there are a decent number of outstanding issues, so I'd like to
>> propose a different approach.
>>
>> I plan to do three release candidate releases:
>>
>> 2.7.6
>> 3.3.3
>> 3.4.0
>>
>> These will only include the latest finalised changes.
>>
>> I'll also make a list of outstanding things that need to be addressed
>> before
>> we can do final releases, and then once these are done, I'll tag and
>> package
>> up the official source releases.
>>
>> Then people can step up to do windows and macos installers.
>>
>> My hope is that then someone who goes to the Stackless web site won't see
>> old versions only being available.  Ideally we'd be able to generate
>> windows
>> and macos installers for the intermediate release candidates, but.. I'm
>> not
>> sure anyone with the right software licenses will find the time.  We'll
>> see.
>>
>> Thoughts? Ideas?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Richard.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stackless mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stackless mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
>

_______________________________________________
Stackless mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless

Reply via email to