This is my attempt to summarize what everyone has been saying so we can get this resolved.
>From what I can tell, most people like the idea of doing a 3.0.1 release ASAP (like "in a week or so" fast) with the stuff that should have been removed from 3.0.0 in the first place removed. People also seem to support doing a 3.1 release April/May where new stuff (e.g. io in C, new shelve back-end for sqlite3) is introduced to the rest of the world. This timeline has the benefit of allowing us to do an alpha release at PyCon and puts us at a six month release cycle which does not portray 3.0 or 3.1 as rushed releases. The sticky points I see are: 1. Barry, who is the release manager for 3.0.1, does not like the idea of the cruft that is being proposed removed from 3.0.1. Personally I say we continue to peer pressure him as I think a new major release is not like our typical minor release, but I am not about to force Barry to go against what he thinks is reasonable unless I am willing to step up as release manager (and I am not since I simply don't have the time to learn the process fast enough along with just a lack of time with other Python stuff). 2. Do we label 3.0.x as experimental? I say no since it isn't experimental; we basically had some bugs slip through that happen to be compatibility problems that were overlooked. I for one never viewed 3.0.x as experimental, just not the best we could necessarily do without more input from the community and our own experience with 3.x in general. Let's see if we can get these two points squared away so we can get 3.0.1 in whatever state it is meant to be in out the door quickly. -Brett _______________________________________________ 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
