2018-09-25 16:30 GMT-03:00 Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com>: > deprecating APIs or behavior. Right now I'm saying "Python 4.0" > implying that 4.0 will be released right after 3.9. > > I've heard multiple opinions on this subject. One of them is that we > should release 4.0 when we have a major new change, like removal of > the GIL or introduction of a JIT compiler. On the other hand, we have > no estimate when we have such a change. We also don't want Python 4.0 > to be backwards incompatible with Python 3.0 (at least not at the > scale of 2 vs 3). So to me, it seems logical that we simply release > Python 4.0 after Python 3.9. After all, after 3.9 Python will be > drastically different from 3.0 and from 2.7. It sounds better. :)
On the other hand... the best chance we have to let the world know that "we will never ever again break everything as we did with the 2 to 3 transition" is to just release 4.0 after 3.9 as a simple follow up release with just the minor and usual glitches we have from minor to minor release. IOW, we're breaking the major/minor revision evolution, but we're firmly signaling that a transition that could take a decade will not happen anymore in the future, that we learned the lesson and all evolution steps will be smooth. See it as more a political/social decision, than a technical one. Note 1: I remember Guido saying something like this, but to be fair I couldn't find any mail with a statement like that in a 10' exploration I just did. Note 2: I know we planned 2.7.10 after 2.7.9, but that just reinforces my point: the idea is to communicate that we'll never have again a dead end like 2.7. Regards, -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/ Twitter: @facundobatista _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
