Am 18.01.2012 01:24, schrieb Jeff Hardy: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Ezio Melotti <ezio.melo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> * What is the effect on PyPy/Jython/IronPython? Can they just skip the >> feature releases and focus on the LTS ones? > > At least for IronPython it's unlikely we'd be able track the feature > releases. We're still trying to catch up as it is. > > Honestly, I don't see the advantages of this. Are there really enough > new features planned that Python needs a full release more than every > 18 months?
Yes, we think so. (What is a non-full release, by the way?) The main reason is changes in the library. We have been getting complaints about the standard library bitrotting for years now, and one of the main reasons it's so hard to a) get decent code into the stdlib and b) keep it maintained is that the release cycles are so long. It's a tough thing for contributors to accept that the feature you've just implemented will only be in a stable release in 16 months. If the stdlib does not get more reactive, it might just as well be cropped down to a bare core, because 3rd-party libraries do everything as well and do it before we do. But you're right that if Python came without batteries, the current release cycle would be fine. (Another, more far-reaching proposal, has been to move the stdlib out of the cpython repo and share a new repo with Jython/IronPython/PyPy. It could then also be released separately from the core. But this is much more work than the current proposal.) Georg _______________________________________________ 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
