2008/10/6 Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> 15-Oct-2008 3.0 beta 4 >> 05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 2 >> 19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3 >> 03-Dec-2008 3.0 final >> >> Given what still needs to be done, is this a reasonable schedule? Do we >> need two more betas? > > Yes to both questions.
I agree with you here. > I'm seeing that people are just starting to download and play with 3.0. > I expect that we'll start getting more feedback on conversion issues, > the C API, screwy interactions with operating systems, bytes/text issues, > unanticipated interactions with other tools, etc. Each user will stress > it in new ways and perhaps reveal a bunch of little integration issues > and documentation issues. Those little fixups way go a long way toward > establishing a good first impression and reputation for 3.0 from the outset. And maybe also here, but bounded. I don't want to keep deferring 3.0 months and months, I prefer to have a redesigned schedule now, and stick to it as much as possible, even if the 3.0 version is not as robust as we would want. Regards, -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/ _______________________________________________ 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
