[Python-Dev] PEP 413: Faster evolution of the Python Standard Library

[Zachary Ware]

Quick disclaimer: this is the first time I've replied on any Python list,
and thus am not entirely sure what I'm doing. Hopefully this message goes
as expected :)

Anyhow; I have to say I like Nick's idea put forth in PEP 413, but I agree
that the extra versioning info could get pretty awkward. Therefore, why not
just make stdlib upgrades part of the regular maintenance releases? As long
as there is absolutely no change in usage from (for example) 3.3.0 to
3.3.1, what's wrong with adding new (stdlib) features in 3.3.1?

Alternately, if we wanted to preserve Nick's thoughts on separate versions
with and without the stdlib upgrades, why not just make them 3.3.1 and
3.3.2, bringing us up to around 3.3.6 at 3.4.0 release? We could take a(n
old) page from Linux development's book and make the oddness/evenness of
the third number meaningful; say odds have stdlib upgrades, evens are
strictly maintenance (or vice versa).

My apologies for the noise if these ideas have been shot down elsewhere
already, but I hadn't seen it so I thought I'd stick my head in for a bit :)

Regards,
Zach Ware

On Feb 25, 2012 2:50 AM, "Nick Coghlan" <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:59 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 13:23, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> >> Am 24.02.2012 18:46, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
> >> > Overall, I like the principle of this PEP, but I really dislike the
> >> > dual version numbering it introduces. Such a numbering scheme will be
> >> > cryptic and awkward for anyone but Python specialists.
> >>
> >> I agree.
> >
> > Ditto.
>
> And, in contrast, I believe that the free-wheeling minor version
> number proposed in PEP 407 is a train wreck and PR disaster waiting to
> happen. I find it interesting that we can so readily agree that using
> the major version number in any way is impossible due to the ongoing
> Python 2 -> 3 transition, yet I get so much pushback on the idea that
> messing with the implications of changing the *minor* version number
> will unnecessarily confuse or upset users.
>
> I spent quite a bit of time thinking about the ways people *use* the
> CPython version number, and it switched me from mildly preferring a
> separate version number for the standard library to being a strong
> *opponent* of increasing the rate of change for the minor version
> number. Anyway, the PEP now describes the user scenarios that
> convinced me that a separate version number for the standard library
> was the right way to go:
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0413/#user-scenarios
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> --
> Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120225/eeea1451/attachment.html>