RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jul 14 17:27:41 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-July/067441.html

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:39:06 -0700, Neal Norwitz <nnorwitz at gmail.com> wrote:
>On 7/13/06, Fredrik Lundh <fredrik at pythonware.com> wrote:

>> a longer beta period gives *external* developers more time to catch up,
>> and results in less work for the end users.

>This is the part I don't get.  For the external developers, if they
>care about compatibility, why aren't they testing periodically,
>regardless of alpha/beta releases?  How often is the python build
>broken or otherwise unusable?

How often do you test new builds of Python against the most recent alpha of,
e.g. the Linux kernel?  This isn't just a hypothetical question: Twisted has
broken because of changes to Linux as often as it has broken due to changes in
Python :).  In Linux's case we're all lucky because *any* regressions with
existing software are considered bugs, whereas in Python's case, some breakagaes
are considered acceptable since it's more feasible to have multiple builds of
Python installed more than multiple kernels for different applications.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-July/067441.html below:

[Python-Dev] Community buildbots (was Re: User's complaints)