p.f.moore at gmail.com
Sat Oct 27 13:06:41 CEST 2012
On 27 October 2012 08:11, Donald Stufft <donald.stufft at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, October 27, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> So that's my concrete proposal:
> 1. We pick a date (June next year sounds about right)
> 2. We pick a stable URL prefix for the Python 2 docs (I vote "/2.x/")
> 3. We start redirecting affected pages immediately
> 4. We add a notice like the one above to the home page of the 2.7
> docs, announce it on the PSF blog, announce it far and wide
> Can we change /py3k/ to /3.x/ and redirect the old one to match?
+1. I'm sorry, but now that Python 3 is up to 3.3, and is a really
solid version, the "py3k" name doesn't feel "official" enough.
> Another idea is similar, but instead of doing /2.x/ always redirect the
> the root of docs.python.org to the latest production release, so
> right now /foo would redirect to /2.7/foo. This is even better for
> maintaining links to the actual resource people meant to link
> to. Could even include a header at the top of old versions saying that
> "You are currently viewing the docs for 2.5. Click here to view the
> docs for 2.7".
-1. Certainly what I (and I suspect many others) usually care about is
getting at the "Python 2" or "Python 3" documentation, not a specific
version. Having the 2.7, 2.6 links is fine, but I don't *think* of
myself as going to the 2.7 docs, but rather to the 2.x docs (as
opposed to 3.x). The "New in x.y" annotations give me the history I
need. And I think that's true of links as well - they would be to
"python 2" or "python 3", not (normally) to a specific minor version.
More information about the Python-ideas