On 9/23/2010 7:12 PM, darren at ontrenet.com wrote: > > So if there turns out to be a major security hole or sever bug in 2.7, > then it shouldn't be filed against 2.7? and fixed in a 2.7.x sort of > branch? > In that case, would you just suggest everyone using 2.7 to jump to 3.x? > > As long as a 2.x version is supported, filing bugs, branching and even > releasing critical updates is, although rare, a fact of life. I am not sure who or what you are responding to. The below is based on the fact the 2.7 is now closed to *new features* and will be as long as the CPython pydev group maintains it. In another post I said that the Versions field is needed for *bugs* as long as we are maintaining 2.7, which will be for several years, because there are and will continue to be 2.7 and 3.x specific bugs. If you want *new features*, then yes, you need to jump to 3.x. Otherwise you can relax, and perhaps contribute to 2.7 bug fixes if you want. >> Now that 2.7 is out, so that feature requests can only be for a future >> 3.x, I would actually like the tracker to restrict the allowed values >> for non-doc feature requests either to 3.2/3.3 or to Not Applicable or >> whatever. It is a nuisance that people can still file such for 2.7, for >> instance. -- Terry Jan Reedy
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