> As long as I've been in the FreeBSD world, I've never seen an alpha/beta > release. What you get are the occasional Developer Preview (I think there > is usually one before each X release (in X.Y). Then there are release > candidates, usually 2-3. Otherwise, people are assumed to work off the > trees directly, and there are tools to keep your system in check very > easily. It's just in the naming then, nothing special. > I have a machine here (dual Ppro, a bit antiquated, but it serves > it's purpose) which CVSups (an automated CVS system) an updated > environment every day, then builds the entire thing (which can take > hours). It's painless for me, and I get to test some things I'm > working on against the bleeding edge with little or no effort. > > In the FreeBSD world, you don't shove experimental code that hasn't > gone through "some testing" into the CURRENT tree. It may not build > everywhere, but it's gone through some testing, and usually will not > cause anyone serious pain. Same for Python. We flame developers who break the build, and as a result this almost never happens (unless the tests pass on *their* machine but not elsewhere). We review code in the SF patch manager (painful). > I guess in the end, I see several competing interests here: > > - People who want minimal to no backward incompatibilities, ever Just say no to upgrades. > - People who want to know that a release will be "supported" for > some defined period I'd be happy to promise that release 2.X will be supported until 2.(X+2) (final) is released. > - People who want the bleeding edge to be more available I believe there are nightly checkout tarballs available from somewhere. But most people go directly to CVS. Anyway, I don't think this group has any problems with the current system. :-) > I would think that 90% of this can be solved with simple communications of > what should be expected. It's not unreasonable to say that 2.1 will be > supported with BUG FIXED (not features, bug fixes) until 2.4 or 2.5 is > released. If we're on a 6-month "minor release" schedule, then that's > roughly a year of stability. That seems generous. I think your math is off (2.4 would be 20 months) but something like that, yeah. --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