Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20150528/a8d5555d/attachment.html below:
<p dir="ltr"><br>
On 28 May 2015 07:48, "Guido van Rossum" <<a href="mailto:guido@python.org">guido@python.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Barry Warsaw <<a href="mailto:barry@python.org">barry@python.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On May 27, 2015, at 05:15 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> >How about a feature release once a year, on a schedule we choose as best for<br>
>> >us.<br>
>><br>
>> We discussed timed releases ages ago and they were rejected by the majority.<br>
>> Time-based releases can make a lot of sense, especially if the interval is<br>
>> short enough. If a feature doesn't make it into the May 2015 release, oh<br>
>> well, there will be another one in X months.<br>
>><br>
>> Ubuntu has had a lot of success with X=6 time-based releases. That's not to<br>
>> say there aren't plenty of logistics to work out, or that they are a panacea,<br>
>> or even that they would work with an all-volunteer developer community. But<br>
>> time-based releases do have advantages too, and maybe those would outweigh the<br>
>> disadvantages for Python at this point.<br>
><br>
><br>
> This favors developers (who want to see their feature launched) and early adopters (who want to try out shiny new features).<br>
><br>
> The current system (release every 18-24 months) was established when users who were decidedly not early adopters started complaining about the breakneck pace of Python releases.<br>
><br>
> It's quite possible that the current crop of Python users are less averse to change (although the conversion rate to Python 3 seems to indicate otherwise). But it's also hard to compare Ubuntu (which is a roll-up of thousands of different open-source projects, with a large variety of different release schedules) to Python (which is a single, centrally-controlled code base).<br>
><br>
> What do other projects that are at most 1 order of magnitude smaller or larger than Python do? E.g. the Linux kernel, or Mysql, or Qt?</p>
<p dir="ltr">The Linux kernel iterates fairly rapidly, with redistributors agreeing on which versions to target for long term support.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Decent overview here: <a href="https://ltsi.linuxfoundation.org/what-is-ltsi">https://ltsi.linuxfoundation.org/what-is-ltsi</a></p>
<p dir="ltr">I don't think the comparison really works though, because it's not just redistributors that are affected, it's alternate implementations of the language specification, as well as educational materials.</p>
<p dir="ltr">If we got to merge gating on trunk, such that it was feasible to release 3.6dev1 within 6 months of the 3.5 release, then that might be a way of satisfying both crowds, since it would be a matter of speeding up the pre-release cycle and increasing the stability expectations for pre-releases, minimising the ripple effects on other parts of the ecosystem.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards,<br>
Nick.</p>
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