[Python-Dev] for __future__ import planning

[Barry Warsaw]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Oct 3, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:

> So now that we've released 2.6 and are working hard on shepherding 3.0
> out the door, it's time to worry about the next set of releases. :)
>
> I propose that we dramatically shorten our release cycle for 2.7/3.1
> to roughly a year and put a strong focus stabilizing all the new
> goodies we included in the last release(s). In the 3.x branch, we
> should continue to solidify the new code and features that were
> introduced. One 2.7's main objectives should be binding 3.x and 2.x
> ever closer.

There are several things that I would like to see us concentrate on  
after the 3.0 release.  I agree that 3.1 should be primarily a  
stabilizing release.  I suspect that we will find a lot of things that  
need tweaking only after 3.0 final has been out there for a while.

I think 2.7 should continue along the path of convergence toward 3.x.   
The vision some of us talked about at Pycon was that at some point  
down the line, maybe there's no difference between "python2.9 -3" and  
"python3.3 -2".

I would really like to see us adopt a distributed version control  
system.

I want our maintenance branches to always be in a releasable state.  I  
want to be confident enough about the tree to be able to cut a point  
release at any time.  I want to release a new point release from the  
maint branches once a month.

Christian rightly points out that with four active trees, we're going  
to a pretty big challenge on our hands.  How do other large open  
source projects handle similar situations?

- -Barry

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)

iQCVAwUBSOajHXEjvBPtnXfVAQJ5qgP+I6k+kHMG2zPTvMIstM2wRmhtAPd7kKz9
S6bXllUBzpxQGMYfqR3Ze5/SVUMEV2HvINPDfg816sGOoxs0fMeori398rU97bkH
tOFHOEi/KLKMdgGdjGWWnV+iPEGF6stPMX/6nGQDhM5NMzj81hBgF+7U+UNbS7iM
dT2wk3vSZHQ=
=q4kW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----