On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:03:15 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
1. I believe the PEP currently proposes just taking the no more than
9 limit off the minor version of the language. Feature releases would
just come out every 6 months, with every 4th release flagged as a
language
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
If I were a casual user of a piece of software, I'd really find such a
numbering scheme complicated and intimidating. I don't think most users
want such a level of information.
I think the ideal numbering scheme from a
On Jan 19, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
The main problem I see with this is that Python 3 was a big
disruptive event for the community, and calling a new version Python
4 may make people anxious at the prospect of compatibility breakage.
s/was/is/
The Python 3 transition is ongoing,
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
Do we have any evidence of this alleged bitrot? I spend a lot of time on the
comp.lang.python newsgroup and I see no evidence that people using Python
On Jan 19, 2012 9:28 AM, Bill Janssen jans...@parc.com wrote:
I'm not sure how much of a problem this really is. I continually build
fairly complicated systems with Python that do a lot of HTTP networking,
for instance. It's fairly easy to replace use of the standard library
modules with use
Le mercredi 18 janvier 2012 à 21:26 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
I'm also wholly in agreement with Ezio that using the
same versioning scheme for both full releases and interim releases is
thoroughly confusing for users
It's a straight-forward way to track the feature support of a release.
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Splitting the stdlib:
- requires someone to do the splitting (highly non-trivial given the
interactions of some modules with interpreter details or low-level C
code)
- requires setting up separate resources
Nick Coghlan writes:
From the stdlib feature development branch (these are the new interim
releases with standard library updates only as proposed by PEP 407):
Python 3.3.1 + stdlib 13.02.0 (~February 2013)
Python 3.3.2 + stdlib 13.08.0 (~August 2013)
Python 3.3.3 + stdlib 14.02.0
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 09:08, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
Splitting the stdlib:
- requires someone to do the splitting (highly non-trivial given the
interactions of some modules with interpreter
Am 18.01.2012 18:56, schrieb Brett Cannon:
IOW we would have a language moratorium every 2 years (i.e. between LTS
releases) while switching to a 6 month release cycle for language/VM bugfixes
and full stdlib releases?
That is certainly a possibility (it's listed as an open issue in the PEP).
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
Doing a release every 6 months that includes updates to the stdlib and
bugfixes to the language/VM also benefits other VMs by getting compatibility
fixes in faster. All of the other VM maintainers have told me that keeping
Brett Cannon wrote:
And honestly, if we don't go with this I'm with Georg's comment in another
email of beginning to consider stripping the stdlib down to core libraries
to help stop with the bitrot (sorry, Paul). If we can't attract new
replacements for modules we can't ditch because of
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:31 AM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com
fwierzbi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
Doing a release every 6 months that includes updates to the stdlib and
bugfixes to the language/VM also benefits other VMs by getting
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
Do we have any evidence of this alleged bitrot? I spend a lot of time on the
comp.lang.python newsgroup and I see no evidence that people using Python
believe the standard library is rotting from
On 1/18/2012 8:06 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Steven D'Apranost...@pearwood.info wrote:
Do we have any evidence of this alleged bitrot? I spend a lot of time on the
comp.lang.python newsgroup and I see no evidence that people using Python
believe the standard
15 matches
Mail list logo
