On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 12:45 AM, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Barry Warsaw schrieb: >> On Oct 3, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: >> >>> So now that we've released 2.6 and are working hard on shepherding 3.0 >>> out the door, it's time to worry about the next set of releases. :) >> >>> I propose that we dramatically shorten our release cycle for 2.7/3.1 >>> to roughly a year and put a strong focus stabilizing all the new >>> goodies we included in the last release(s). In the 3.x branch, we >>> should continue to solidify the new code and features that were >>> introduced. One 2.7's main objectives should be binding 3.x and 2.x >>> ever closer. >> >> There are several things that I would like to see us concentrate on >> after the 3.0 release. I agree that 3.1 should be primarily a >> stabilizing release. I suspect that we will find a lot of things that >> need tweaking only after 3.0 final has been out there for a while. >> >> I think 2.7 should continue along the path of convergence toward 3.x. >> The vision some of us talked about at Pycon was that at some point >> down the line, maybe there's no difference between "python2.9 -3" and >> "python3.3 -2". > > Especially 3.1 should also be a release where we focus as much on the > community as on the code. There are many people out there for whom > Python 3, as an incompatible language, is not an easy step to make, > especially those with huge 2.x codebases on their hands. They have > two problems: The libraries they depend on aren't ported, and the > KLOC of code they care about are hard and tedious work to port, not > to mention that it typically isn't viewed as productive work by those > who pay them. > > We need to make 2to3 and related tools reliable and do more showcases > of porting, like Martin did with Django, so that people have real-world > examples at their disposal, by which they can estimate their own > porting needs. (Waiting for the extended community to deliver such > examples may be a mistake.) > > We also need to commit to help people with porting. I propose a new > mailing list (e.g. python3-porting), parallel to python-list, > specifically for people going that way. I think it will help to > focus the community effort of getting Python 3 off the ground. >
This is a good idea; python-help for porting. > Last not least, there should be a *central* location on python.org where > specifically all resources on 2->3 transition are collected. Talks, > documents, links, and some crucial information many people seem to miss, > such as how long the 2.x series will at least be maintained. They depend > on this. That seems reasonable if someone gets around to doing it. =) -Brett _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
