From my own perspective it seems that 2.1.x is viewed as the stable release family, and each micro release reaffirms its stability.
GvR> That's about right. Maybe we should continue to promote GvR> 2.1.x and relegate 2.2 to the bleeding edge? A simple GvR> rearrangement of the website might be sufficient.
That might not be a bad idea. 2.2's got some neat stuff in it, but until it's well documented, and really beat upon, I don't think we can rightly call it stable. From my own perspective, while it's gotten pretty hard to continue to support Python 2.0 (nested scopes, warnings, weak refs, the improved build process, and lib fixes), Python 2.1 seems like a good baseline.
That's a good thing. That 2.2.x is viewed as more experimental is simply caused by the new type/class stuff, and I don't think there's much marketing you could do to change that perception. Maybe 2.2 should have been called 3.0 <wink>.
GvR> Or maybe 2.3 should become 2.2.3. <0.5 wink>
I think the new bool type has already prevented that.