On 18 January 2012 04:32, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: >> It's really about making feature releases more frequent, > >> not making previews available during development. > > Given the difficulty of making a complete windows build, it would be nice to > have one made available every 6 months, regardless of how it is labeled. > > I believe that some people will see and use good-for-6-months releases as > previews of the new features that will be in the 'real', normal, bug-fix > supported, long-term releases.
I'd love to see 6-monthly releases, including Windows binaries, and binary builds of all packages that needed a compiler to build. Oh, and a pony every LTS release :-) Seriously, this proposal doesn't really acknowledge the amount of work by other people that would be needed for a 6-month release to be *usable* in normal cases (by Windows users, at least). It's usually some months after a release on the current schedule that Windows binaries have appeared for everything I use regularly. I could easily imagine 3rd-party developers tending to only focus on LTS releases, making the release cycle effectively *slower* for me, rather than faster. Paul PS Things that might help improve this: (1) PY_LIMITED_API, and (2) support in packaging for binary releases, including a way to force installation of a binary release on the "wrong" version (so that developers don't have to repackage and publish identical binaries every 6 months). _______________________________________________ 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
