On 2018-04-03 18:09, Paul G wrote:
On 04/03/2018 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 at 07:39 Paul G <p...@ganssle.io> wrote:
Paul's point is that he knows e.g. code working in 3.6.0 will work when he
upgrades to 3.6.5, and if his code is warning-free and works with all
__future__ statements in 3.6 that it will work fine in 3.7. With CalVer you
could make a similar promise if you keep the major version the year of
release and then keep our feature/bugfix number promise like we already
have, but at that point who cares about the year?
I think it is reasonable to use a scheme like this:
YY.MM.patch
Surely that should be:
YYYY.MM.patch
[snip]
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
