RetroSearch Browse

Mon May 22 23:24:58 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-May/065117.html

Thomas Wouters wrote:

> On 5/22/06, skip at pobox.com <skip at pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>     Tim> If there's no functionality changes, what would be the
>     problem with Tim> putting it in post-alpha?
> 
> It still represents new code that may introduce new bugs.  In theory
> (and 
> generally in practice for Python), once you move into the beta stage
> all you 
> do is fix bugs.
> 
> 
> Note that the problem isn't 'post-alpha', it's 'post-beta' -- new
> features (especially minor or long-agreed-upon) are fine up until
> beta1 ;)  

Isn't "beta" post-alpha? <wink>

I did of course mean once we were out of the alpha stage. If they're
purely performance changes (no new functionality) then there's no
problem with putting it in during beta - IMO even if it introduces new
bugs (so long as those bugs are gone by the time 2.5 goes final).

Beta is "feature set frozen".

Tim Delaney

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-May/065117.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] r46043 - peps/trunk/pep-0356.txt