Georg Brandl <g.brandl <at> gmx.net> writes: > > skip <at> pobox.com schrieb: > > Martin> And if *2.6* becomes the last of the 2.x series? > > > > With all due respect, I don't think you can make that decision now. The > > time to have stated 2.6 would be the end of the 2.x line was when 2.6 was > > released. At that point instead of opening up the trunk for changes you > > would have closed it off or merged the py3k branch to trunk. 2.6.0 was > > released over a year ago and there has been no effort to suppress bug fix or > > feature additions to trunk since then. If you call 2.6 "the end of 2.x" > > you'll have wasted a year of work on 2.7 with about a month to go before the > > first 2.7 alpha release. > > +1. +1 as well. Besides, it is much better communication to release 2.7 and say up front that it will be the last major release in the 2.x line. Announcing that there won't be a 2.7, however, would give the impression of poor planning. Regards Antoine.
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