> Ive been running the string_methods tag (term?) under CVS for quite some > time now, and it seems to work perfectly. I admit that I havent stressed > the string methods much, but I feel confident that Barry's patches havent > broken existing string code. > > Also, I find using that tag with CVS a bit of a pain. A few updates have > been checked into the main branch, and you tend to miss these (its a pity > CVS can't be told "only these files are affected by this tag, so the rest > should follow the main branch." I know I can do that personally, but that > means I personally need to know all files possibly affected by the branch.) > Anyway, I digress... > > I propose that these extensions be merged into the main branch. The main > advantage is that we force more people to bash on it, rather than allowing > them to make that choice <wink>. If the Unicode type is also considered > highly experimental, we can make a new tag for that change, but that is > really quite independant of the string methods. Hmm... This would make it hard to make a patch release for 1.5.2 (possible called 1.5.3?). I *really* don't want the string methods to end up in a release yet -- there are too many rough edges (e.g. some missing methods, should join str() or not, etc.). I admit that managing CVS branches is painful. We may find that it works better to create a branch for patch releases and to do all new development on the main release... But right now I don't want to change anything yet. In any case Barry just went on vacation so we'll have to wait 10 days... --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4