-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Feb 22, 2008, at 6:54 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
I've volunteered to be the release manager for Python 2.6 and 3.0. It's been several years since I've RM'd a Python release, and I'm happy to do it again (he says while the medication is still working :).
Can the PSF buy you more of the meds? =)
Depends on the jurisdiction. :)
I would like to get the next alpha releases of both versions out before Pycon, so I propose next Friday, February 29 for both.
Since they are just alphas, sure. Not like I am going to make any earth-shattering changes that soon.
Guido reminded me that we released Python 1.6 and 2.0 together and it makes sense to both of us to do the same for Python 2.6 and 3.0. I don't think it will be that much more work (for me at least :) to release them in lockstep, so I think we should try it. I won't try to sync their pre-release version numbers except at the milestones (e.g. first beta, release candidates, final releases).
I propose to change PEP 361 to outline the release schedule for both Python 2.6 and 3.0. I'm hoping we can work out a more definite schedule at Pycon, but for now I want to at least describe the lockstep release schedule and the Feb 29 date.
I'd also like for us to consider doing regular monthly releases. Several other FLOSS projects I'm involved with are doing this to very good success. The nice thing is that everyone knows well in advance when the next release is going to happen, and so all developers and users know what to expect and what is needed from them.
I'd like to propose that we do a joint release the last Friday of every month. For the alphas, it's basically what's in svn. This gives us some time to experiment with the process out and see if we like it enough to keep it going through the betas and final releases.
If you want to do monthly alphas, go for it! But if you are going to do that frequently is a source release going to make more sense than doing binary builds?
It very well might. See Christian Heimes's follow up re: Windows builds. OTOH, I'm okay if at least for the alphas, the binary builds lag behind the source releases, though I'd like to get the process as streamlined as possible.