Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, we need to come up with a new release schedule for Python 3.0. My
suggestion:
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?
I know I'm contradicting what I said earlier, but perhaps we should
just forget going back to beta and stick to ever-more-perfect release
candidates? In other worlds release candidates often contain tons of
imperfections (I believe I've seen this both for Java and Windows) and
the label "release candidate" more clearly encourages people to
download and play with it, which is what we need at this point! Then
the schedule would be something like
15-Oct-2008 3.0 rc 2
05-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 3
19-Nov-2008 3.0 rc 4
03-Dec-2008 3.0 final
As a user, I agree, even if it does stretch the usual notion of rc.
Having a beta follow and be better than a gamma (rc) would be confusing.
Also, it was the rc designation that encouraged more people to download
and play with rc1. I think there has definitely been more attention on
3.0 on c.l.p lately.
_______________________________________________
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
