My assumption is that most users will relate to the PEP 0404 numbering, and won't have a use for the Stackless versioning.
Rather than: Stackless x.y SLP z.q I propose we have: Stackless x.y And then have z.q queryable through 'stackless.getversion()' or something similar. On 3/8/14, Christian Tismer <[email protected]> wrote: > The Stackless version was never maintained very well. > > "3.1b3" never changed after 2004-06-03 (!) > and so the version string was "3.1b3 040603". > > The version number was kept until today (although I wanted it to be changed, > when major changes were done, but did not do it myself). > > From time to time I updated the date of the stackless version, like > these findings in an email history search: > ... > ! #define STACKLESS_VERSION "3.1b3 040719" > ... > ! #define STACKLESS_VERSION "3.1b3 041130" > ... > /* keep this entry up-to-date */ > -#define STACKLESS_VERSION "3.1b3 050929" > +#define STACKLESS_VERSION "3.1b3 060504" > > Andrew Dahlke did in fact what the comment says: > /* keep this entry up-to-date */ > -#define STACKLESS_VERSION "3.1b3 060504" > +#define STACKLESS_VERSION "3.1b3 060516"... > > For the records: 2006-05-15 was the first time that the PyQT problem was > mentioned ;-) > > So the 3.1b3 was never ever changed, even not on the 2006 Stackless sprint. > > > On ditching the number: > --------------------- > > The number was meant to show a version of stackless design, which worked > until that 3.1b3 version. > The date was there to see when a version was created. > > I think it is bad do just ditch it, and it is bad to keep it as it is. > > When we submit stackless 2.8, the problem becomes worse, because > then the version number is the 0404 replacement for Python, and then > we have no version number for Stackless itself, at all. > > What to do? > > After all that many refinements, improvements and changes, a version > bump for > the stackless design is needed, and after all the new 3.x versions of > Python, > I think it is better to go on more drastically. > > What about the following example: > > "Stackless 2.8 SLP 4.0" for the 404 case, maybe with a SLP date > string as well > "Stackless 2.8 SLP 4.0 140207" > > and in the 2.7/3.x case until we completely migrate to Stackless: > > "Python 3.3 SLP 4.0 140207" > "Python 2.7.6 SLP 4.0 140207" > > or should we toss the "design date" in favor of finer SLP versioning? > > I think we should not go completely without it, but keep it apart from > python > version numbers, and also do an announcement. > > cheers - Chris > > > On 04.03.14 20:26, Richard Tew wrote: >> You mean like: >> >> Python 3.2.5 Stackless 3.2. >> >> It looks confusing. Better just to ditch the number I think. >> >> On 3/5/14, Kristján Valur Jónsson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> why not just go with 3.2? Does anyone use this number at all anyway? >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:stackless- >>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Tew >>>> Sent: 3. mars 2014 02:20 >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: [Stackless] stackless_version.h >>>> >>>> 3.1b3 060516 is kind of a magic number, maybe we could do away with it? >>>> I >>>> was going to bump it to 3.2, but decided it would be a little confusing. >>>> >>>> Objections? >>>> >>>> Python 2.7.6r2 Stackless 3.1b3 060516 (default, Mar 3 2014, 15:11:44) >>>> [MSC >>>> v.1500 32 bit (Intel)] on win32 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or >>>> "license" >>>> for more information. >>>> >>>> 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 > > > -- > Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:[email protected]> > Software Consulting : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's > Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121 : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/ > 14482 Potsdam : PGP key -> http://pgp.uni-mainz.de > phone +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 (30) 700143-0023 > PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 > whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Stackless mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless _______________________________________________ Stackless mailing list [email protected] http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
