[Python-ideas] stdlib with its own release cycle ?
brett at python.org
Mon Oct 26 00:24:55 CET 2009
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 16:06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> > Guido van Rossum schrieb:
> >> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 4:56 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> >>> Exactly. Since with the moratorium in effect, we are basically changing
> >>> *nothing but* the stdlib, it has its own release cycle already :)
> >> Not true. There is much core work that can be done without changing
> >> the language definition (e.g. removing the GIL, speedups). Also,
> >> extension modules written in C presumably don't fall under the
> >> separate stdlib release but are excluded from the moratorium.
> > I'd have counted them among the stdlib.
> Hmm, but C extensions don't work with other implementations (at least
> not with Jython, IronPython, PyPy).
> > You're of course right, other
> > core work can and should be done, but it won't be as visible as new
> > modules or improved APIs in there.
> Depends. Imagine Unladen Swallow merged in -- it would be huge from
> all kinds of perspectives (pro and con, I suppose) but wouldn't change
> the language at all.
> > Anyway, we'll probably get a better picture of what 3.2 will look like
> > after the PEP is written and we have a rough release schedule. Before
> > it's moot to decide on a separate stdlib release.
> Hm, I think the separate-stdlib-release idea needs separate discussion
> quite independent of the moratorium.
This has been debated in the stdlib-sig (came up when we talked about
argparse) if you want some viewpoints. It is definitely a separate
discussion and I expect it will be brought up at the language summit.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas