-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 4, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
From: "A.M. Kuchling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I think we should also have a statement upon on python.org about
future plans: e.g.
* that there will be a Python 2.7 that will incorporate what we
learn from
people trying to port,
* that 3.1 will rearrange the standard library in mostly-known
ways, and * that we expect people to use 3.0 mostly for
compatibility testing, not going into serious production use until
3.1 or maybe even 3.2.
The latter statement worries me. It seems to unnecessarily undermine
adoption of 3.0. It essentially says, "don't use this". Is that
what we want?
ISTM, 3.0 is in pretty good shape. There is nothing intrinsically
wrong
with it. The number one adoption issue is external, i.e. how quickly
key third-party modules get converted.
I agree. I tried to put a positive spin on the announcement, and the
backward compatibility issue in particular. I probably failed.
- -Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBSTgybHEjvBPtnXfVAQJPjgP+NeyLY2ACryOmxeRV8qcotKrMJZYBwu6q
gtNjax3m0faRr2VrRwVLpiJqBoVkwpr+heKg7z2rR183MstsgQ9QsQpkZXBV+QnH
yK1yA18jaVZhLMR0VPT75GN1KPp5KCL+TbuT0cFtJ/SSt1LT5K356jdMYFi/ZbUP
t2YtaWoxB5o=
=4lo8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
