On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
On 23.02.2011 20:43, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Or you realized later how nice it would be, grabbed the time machine,
and fixed 10 release blockers on the 19th. :)
No no no. He actually grabbed the time machine, drove 20 years
As pointed out by Ramiro Morales on the Python-Argentina list
(quoting Guido's blog post
http://python-history.blogspot.com/2009/01/brief-timeline-of-python.html
)
Python 0.9.0 was released on 20 Feb 1991
Python 3.2.0 was released on 20 Feb 2011
Python's come a long way.
I look forward to the
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
As pointed out by Ramiro Morales on the Python-Argentina list
(quoting Guido's blog post
http://python-history.blogspot.com/2009/01/brief-timeline-of-python.html
)
Python 0.9.0 was released on 20 Feb 1991
Python 3.2.0 was
On 23.02.2011 19:51, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
As pointed out by Ramiro Morales on the Python-Argentina list
(quoting Guido's blog post
http://python-history.blogspot.com/2009/01/brief-timeline-of-python.html
)
Python 0.9.0
2011/2/23 Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net:
On 23.02.2011 19:51, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
As pointed out by Ramiro Morales on the Python-Argentina list
(quoting Guido's blog post
Or you realized later how nice it would be, grabbed the time machine,
and fixed 10 release blockers on the 19th. :)
No no no. He actually grabbed the time machine, drove 20 years back,
and gave it to Guido so he could release Python 0.9 in time. Guido
then kept the machine ever since.
Regards,
On Feb 23, 2011, at 08:43 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Or you realized later how nice it would be, grabbed the time machine,
and fixed 10 release blockers on the 19th. :)
No no no. He actually grabbed the time machine, drove 20 years back,
and gave it to Guido so he could release Python 0.9 in
On 23.02.2011 20:43, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Or you realized later how nice it would be, grabbed the time machine,
and fixed 10 release blockers on the 19th. :)
No no no. He actually grabbed the time machine, drove 20 years back,
and gave it to Guido so he could release Python 0.9 in time.
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
And the number 1 reason I consider messing with the numbering to be a bad
idea:
3.2= 3.2.0
False
(3, 2)= (3, 2, 0)
False
If we miss anything, it could easily lead to errors like the two
above.
How are
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 10:52:16 -0800
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 09:34, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
'x.y' is known to be ambiguous and confusing.
In most actual usages, I believe, it
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:20, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Agreed. Although better to defer it to 3.3.0 at this point.
+1.0.0 for that.
Yes, it's confusing, but it's going to be even more confusing if it's
called 3.2 sometimes and 3.2.0 sometimes.
--
Lennart Regebro:
On 2/17/2011 1:36 AM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 1:34 AM, Terry Reedytjre...@udel.edu wrote:
'x.y' is known to be ambiguous and confusing.
Not really.
Actually, to me, the confusion is slightly worse, and the reason to
change slightly stronger, than I initially
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 3:19 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Actually, to me, the confusion is slightly worse, and the reason to change
slightly stronger, than I initially explained. Python x.y is a version of
the *language*. CPython x.y.z is an occasional marked release of an
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
For the 3.2 series, I think living with the ambiguity for another 6
months or so (however long it is until 3.2.1 is released) is the
better choice. There are enough parts of the release process that
involve the version
On 17/02/2011 22:01, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Nick Coghlanncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
For the 3.2 series, I think living with the ambiguity for another 6
months or so (however long it is until 3.2.1 is released) is the
better choice. There are enough parts of the
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
'x.y' is known to be ambiguous and confusing.
In most actual usages, I believe, it refers to the latest x.y.z release.
On the site, the 'x.y' docs are almost always the latest version of the
docs (actually x.y.z+additional
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 09:34, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
'x.y' is known to be ambiguous and confusing.
In most actual usages, I believe, it refers to the latest x.y.z release. On
the site, the 'x.y' docs are almost
On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
+1
(I'd have said +0 for the humor of it :).
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
+1
(I'd have said +0 for the humor of it :).
+0
I actually *am* only +0, since I like the idea in
Le mercredi 16 février 2011 à 14:05 -0500, Barry Warsaw a écrit :
On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
+1
(I'd have said +0 for the humor of it :).
Should we write +1.0, +1.3 or just +1? Mark can maybe
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 12:34 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
- -1
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
+1
(I'd have said +0 for the humor of it :).
+0
On 2/16/2011 5:39 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Barry Warsawba...@python.org wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
+1
(I'd have said +0 for the humor of it :).
+0
I actually
Am 17.02.2011 03:08, schrieb Raymond Hettinger:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
+1
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 1:34 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
'x.y' is known to be ambiguous and confusing.
Not really.
x.y seems to be saying it is a milestone (major release) and we all
have got used to that convention.
In most actual usages, I believe, it refers to the latest x.y.z
25 matches
Mail list logo
