> 4) If some feature set turns out to be worrisome, I would rather delay > it for Py2.5 than hold up Py2.4 indefinitely. The AST people know best > whether their work is fit for commitment. If it's not ready, then let > it cook on its own time. Basically, it's ready when it's ready. While I wholeheartedly agree with the principles you elaborate and the conclusions drawn from them, you should be aware that, at PyCon, we have set firm deadlines for a number of potential changes. The AST branch either gets merged by May 1, or it does not get merged for Python 2.4. Its authors are very much interested in completing it and feel that it may never get completed unless a concerted effort is made in that direction now. > Does anyone have a good reason that the first alpha cannot go out in > May? I can accept the position of contributors that they really want to see their work released, especially if they are willing to abide by deadlines they have agreed to. I must accept (and will actively support) a schedule that the release manager has set. While I don't quite remember it been actually mentioned, I somehow got the impression that Anthony's personal schedule (as well as the upcoming release of 2.3.4) have contributed to initiating a 2.4 release a few months later than May. Regards, Martin
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