Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Jun 09, 2010, at 01:15 AM, Fred Drake wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Senthil Kumaran <orsent...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> it would still be a good idea to >>> introduce some of them in minor releases in 2.7. I know, this >>> deviating from the process, but it could be an option considering that >>> 2.7 is the last of 2.x release. >> I disagree. >> >> If there are going to be features going into *any* post 2.7.0 version, >> there's no reason not to increment the revision number to 2.8, >> >> Since there's also a well-advertised decision that 2.7 will be the >> last 2.x, such a 2.8 isn't planned. But there's no reason to violate >> the no-features-in-bugfix-releases policy. We've seen violations >> cause trouble and confusion, but we've not seen it be successful. >> >> The policy wasn't arbitrary; let's stick to it. > > I completely agree with Fred. New features in point releases will cause many > more headaches than opening up a 2.8, which I still hope we don't do. I'd > rather see all that pent up energy focussed on doing whatever we can to help > people transition to Python 3. > Though one might ironically suggest that sticking to the policy actually represents a change in policy :)
regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 See Python Video! http://python.mirocommunity.org/ Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ UPCOMING EVENTS: http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/ "All I want for my birthday is another birthday" - Ian Dury, 1942-2000 _______________________________________________ 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
