IMHO if there's still big scary stuff out there, calling this a release candidate does us no good PR-wise, and does no good for our users. 3.0 is going to be scary enough for them as it is - cutting a release candidate that we either know is broken, or else has significant changes, is a very bad idea.
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fred Drake wrote: >> On Oct 2, 2008, at 8:59 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >>> A big +1 from me for declaring it still in beta until all the 3.0 >>> release blockers are fixed. >> >> +1 from me as well. From what I've read about the pathname issues, I'm >> pretty worried about the usability of 3.0. > > If you don't make a habit of borking your own filesystems with dodgy > filenames, it runs fine. > > Cheers, > Nick. > > -- > Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia > --------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.boredomandlaziness.org > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
