On 18/08/2010 21:59, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > Am 18.08.2010 17:11, schrieb Michael Foord: > >> Could (and should) the online Python 3.1 docs be updated to show Python >> 2.7 as stable? >> > I think the answer is "no, it could not". > > How many old documentation sets would you want to go through, and > regenerate them? There is also > > http://docs.python.org/release/2.6.5/ > http://docs.python.org/release/2.6.4/ > http://docs.python.org/release/2.6.3/ > > etc. > > In particular, > > http://docs.python.org/release/2.6.2/ > > still lists 3.1 as in-development. > > If that would be fixed, I think the fix should work for all > documentation sets, and such a fix might be difficult to implement. > > Ok, fair enough. Michael > Regards, > Martin > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
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