A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-August/081775.html below:

[Python-Dev] [python-committers] next beta

[Python-Dev] [python-committers] next betaM.-A. Lemburg mal at egenix.com
Wed Aug 13 01:21:55 CEST 2008
First, I'd like to know why this discussion is happening on
the committers list.

Python-dev is the right list for these things. I've adjusted the
CC accordingly.

On 2008-08-12 20:44, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>>> I am planning to offer a single file patch for 2.3 and 2.4. As far as
>>>> one more 2.5 release, I don't think there's going to be many changes
>>>> to the 2.5 branch between now and 2.6/3.0 final - although if there
>>>> is, we'll obviously have to do another release.
>>> I would like to establish a tradition where, after some final bug fix
>>> release (e.g. for 2.5), further "mere" bug fixes are banned from the
>>> maintenance branch (and I did revert several bug fixes from the 2.4
>>> branch).
>> I'm not sure I agree with this policy.  Can you elaborate on /why/ you
>> want this?
> 
> Because there won't typically be sufficient testing and release
> infrastructure to allow arbitrary bug fixes to be committed on the
> branch. The buildbots are turned off, and nobody tests the release
> candidate, no Windows binaries are provided - thus, chances are very
> high that a bug fix release for some very old branch will be *worse*
> than the previous release, rather than better.

Second, I don't think this is true. People using those patch
level releases will test and report bugs if they are introduced
by such backports.

Besides, developers backporting such changes are diligent enough
to test their changes - they will usually have a reason for applying
the extra effort to backport.

I don't see any advantage in undoing already tested and committed
patches to an older branch.

Note that Python 2.4 is still widely used out there. As an
example, all the Zope and Plone installations run Python 2.4 and
will continue to do so for quite a while.

And there's a reason for this slow uptake of Python 2.5: as more
and more servers run 64-bit OSes, the Py_ssize_t changes cause
serious trouble with Python C extensions that were not updated
by their authors.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Aug 13 2008)
 >>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
 >>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
 >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

:::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,MacOSX for free ! ::::


    eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
     D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
            Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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