Ok, thank you Raymond for checking.
Victor
Le 23 nov. 2016 05:25, "Raymond Hettinger" a
écrit :
>
> > On Nov 22, 2016, at 6:57 AM, Victor Stinner
> wrote:
> >
> > Should I revert these changes?
>
> I don't think reverting any of these would improve the release.
> I vote for them to stay.
>
>
>
On 23 November 2016 at 06:40, Steve Dower wrote:
> On 22Nov2016 1150, R. David Murray wrote:
>>
>> Being who we are (precisionist programmers), the inconsistency between
>> "beta release cuts off features" and "last beta before RC cuts off
>> non-release-critical fixes" does produce some cognitive
> On Nov 22, 2016, at 6:57 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> Should I revert these changes?
I don't think reverting any of these would improve the release.
I vote for them to stay.
Raymond
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@pytho
If we want the version to be PEP 440 compliant it'd be like 3.6rc1.dev0 or so
if I remember correctly.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 22, 2016, at 3:40 PM, Steve Dower wrote:
>
>> On 22Nov2016 1150, R. David Murray wrote:
>> Being who we are (precisionist programmers), the inconsistency between
On 22Nov2016 1150, R. David Murray wrote:
Being who we are (precisionist programmers), the inconsistency between
"beta release cuts off features" and "last beta before RC cuts off
non-release-critical fixes" does produce some cognitive dissonance.
I've seen the RC described as "the first beta tha
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:47:35 -0500, Ned Deily wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2016, at 12:59, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > I think for me what made everything click was realizing that we used
> > to say "until rc1 is cut, treat it as the beta phase", while Ned is
> > saying "since b4 is the last beta, we are now
On Nov 22, 2016, at 12:59, Brett Cannon wrote:
> I think for me what made everything click was realizing that we used to say
> "until rc1 is cut, treat it as the beta phase", while Ned is saying "since b4
> is the last beta, we are now working towards the RC". I actually think Ned's
> approach
On Nov 22, 2016, at 09:57, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2016-11-22 8:24 GMT+01:00 Ned Deily :
>> OK, all of the release engineering for 3.6.0b4 is complete. The 3.6 branch
>> in the cpython repo is now available again but, as noted, *only* for
>> reviewed release critical fixes appropriate for the 3
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 at 09:45 Ned Deily wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2016, at 10:20, R. David Murray wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but I find this confusing. It wasn't what I understood
> > your previous email to mean, which means I didn't read it carefully
> > enough and saw it through a filter of my preconcepti
On Nov 22, 2016, at 10:20, R. David Murray wrote:
> I'm sorry, but I find this confusing. It wasn't what I understood
> your previous email to mean, which means I didn't read it carefully
> enough and saw it through a filter of my preconceptions.
No problem! We are doing things a bit differently
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 02:24:37 -0500, Ned Deily wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2016, at 02:02, Ned Deily wrote:
> > On behalf of the Python development community and the Python 3.6 release
> > team, I'm pleased to announce the availability of Python 3.6.0b4. 3.6.0b4
> > is the last planned beta release of Pyt
Hi,
2016-11-22 8:24 GMT+01:00 Ned Deily :
> OK, all of the release engineering for 3.6.0b4 is complete. The 3.6 branch
> in the cpython repo is now available again but, as noted, *only* for reviewed
> release critical fixes appropriate for the 3.6.0 final and for final 3.6.0
> doc updates!
So
On Nov 22, 2016, at 02:02, Ned Deily wrote:
> On behalf of the Python development community and the Python 3.6 release
> team, I'm pleased to announce the availability of Python 3.6.0b4. 3.6.0b4
> is the last planned beta release of Python 3.6, the next major release of
> Python. [...]
OK, all of
13 matches
Mail list logo