On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 11:16:41 +0100 mar...@v.loewis.de wrote: > > Quoting Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com>: > > > If you don't want to do an rc3 despite the cherry picked changes since > > rc2, then you need to make it easy for people to test the changes > > directly from the release branch. An opaque intermittently updated > > tarball is not acceptable when none of our infrastructure is designed > > to work that way. I was OK with just the tarball when I assumed you > > would an rc3 if non-trivial defects were found in rc2. If that's not > > the case, then we *need* a public mirror of your release clone. > > Another rc or not - I expect to see a 3.4.1 release *really* shortly after > the 3.4.0 release. So except for issues where Python does not work at all, > any glitches that remain in the code can be fixed in the bug fix release.
I agree with Martin. At this point, we'd better release 3.4.0 (fixing any critical regressions, but leaving non-critical ones aside), then patiently collect evidence of issues, and fix them in non-rush mode for 3.4.1. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
