On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 16:08, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > I think we've reached a consensus on those two PEPs. > > Although, there's one last point that was forgotten in the discussions > : I've introduced "rc" in the pre-releases markers, so PEP 386 is > compatible with Python's own version scheme. "rc" comes right after > "c" in the sorting. It's slightly redundant with the "c" marker but I > don't think this really matters as long as consumers know how to order > them (a < b < c < rc). I have also stated that "c" is the preferred > marker for third party projects, from PEP 386 point of view. > > Is there anything else I can do to make those two PEPs accepted ? > As you said, consensus has been reached, so just Guido's BDFL stamp of approval is all I can think of. -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
