[Python-Dev] Continuing 2.x

Tres Seaver tseaver at palladion.com
Thu Oct 28 19:47:04 CEST 2010


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

On 10/28/2010 09:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> 2010/10/28 Kristján Valur Jónsson <kristjan at ccpgames.com>:
>> Hello all.
>> So, python 2.7 is in bugfix only mode.  ‘trunk’ is off limit.  So, where
>> does one make improvements to the distinguished, and still very much alive,
>> 2.x series of Python?
>>
>> The answer would seem to be “one doesn’t”.  But must it be that way?
> 
> When python-dev chose to switch our own focus for new features to 3.x
> only, we were quite aware that a new group forming to continue with
> 2.8 was a definite possibility. If you do decide to go ahead with the
> idea, I have a few suggestions:
> 
> 1. Since the distinguishing feature is that this branch is a 2.x
> version that will accept new features, in contrast to the python-dev
> maintained bugfix-only 2.7 maintenance branch, please call the branch
> something-or-other-2.8, rather than any form of 2.7.
> 2. Check with Benjamin how he plans to handle 2.7 maintenance
> releases. If he plans to release from SVN, use that as your upstream
> master. If 2.7.1 will instead be released from hg.python.org, wait
> until the switch happens then use the relevant hg branch as the
> upstream.
> 3. Choose your target audience early (if the target is only developers
> with existing 2.x installations that can build their own version of
> Python, then that simplifies release management significantly, since
> you don't need to build binaries any more).
> 4. Decide whether or not you need a buildbot farm (this relates to
> point 3: you may choose to limit your audience to people that are
> happy to run the test suite themselves on their own target platforms
> of interest).
> 5. Give some thought to how you will handle controversial design
> decisions (since you won't have the fallback of appealing to the BDFL,
> and feedback from python-dev is likely to be limited).
> 6. Asking for a python-org SIG mailing list may be a reasonable idea
> as well (e.g. py2x-sig)
> 7. As 3.x usage grows, such a group may have a vested interest in
> helping with 3to2 development as well as simplifying backporting of
> 3.x extension modules to 2.x.
> 
> A 2.8 branch that sells itself as being suitable only for people
> willing to run their own builds and QA could definitely have a place
> in the world (CCP at least would obviously find it useful, but I
> wouldn't be surprised to find other companies that might consider
> adopting such a branch if the benefits of the new features over the
> official 2.7 releases were sufficiently compelling).
> 
> I don't believe anyone here is implacably opposed to the idea of 2.8
> development continuing - it's just that the "collective we" of
> python-dev isn't interested in making it happen, so a new crop of
> developers will need to step up if it is going to become more than a
> CCP-specific 2.x fork.

Thanks for the helpful guidance to such prospective volunteers!


Tres.
- -- 
===================================================================
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkzJtxgACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6OKgCcCH1Wt0Bg1COSqMdBm7whSL8H
JOMAnRqA9jy8eazZnTMV+Q/gvKNX7zLb
=yu2I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list