RetroSearch Browse

Mon Mar 10 17:49:44 CET 2014 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133039.html

On Mon Mar 10 2014 at 12:47:21 PM, Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov>
wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info>wrote:
>
>
>> If Python 4 is a conservative release, I don't see any reason to bump
>> the major version number until after Python 3.9.
>
>
> and why even then?
>
>
>> Perhaps we need a long-term schedule?
>>
>
> why not:
>
> 3.5: August 2015
>> 3.6: February 2017
>> 3.7: August 2018
>> 3.8: February 2020
>> 3.9: August 2021
>
> 3.10: February 2023
>>
> 3.11 August 2023
> 3.12 February 2024
> ....
>
> version numbering is not  decimal -- a bump to 4.0 should mean _something_
>
> (Though from the above, we've got a few years before we need to worry
> about that!)
>

I think it got lost in email threading, but Barry pointed out that Guido
famously hates double digit version numbers (as do I, probably partially
because he does after all these years =).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140310/de118a9d/attachment-0001.html>

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

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133039.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python 4: don't remove anything, don't break backward compatibility