RetroSearch Browse

Thu Feb 17 23:35:30 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-February/108094.html

On 17/02/2011 22:01, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Nick Coghlan<ncoghlan at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> For the 3.2 series, I think living with the ambiguity for another 6
>> months or so (however long it is until 3.2.1 is released) is the
>> better choice. There are enough parts of the release process that
>> involve the version number that we *really* shouldn't be messing with
>> it during the RC phase.
> And the number 1 reason I consider messing with the numbering to be a bad idea:
>
>>>> "3.2">= "3.2.0"
> False
>>>> (3, 2)>= (3, 2, 0)
> False
>
> If we miss anything, it could easily lead to errors like the two
> above.

How are those errors?  Surely what matters is that the following *is* True:

 >>> (3, 2, 0) >= (3, 2)
True
 >>> "3.2.0" >= "3.2"
True

I'm +1 for the change, but happy for it to happen for 3.3.0 given how 
close we are to 3.2 release.

Michael Foord

> I'll grant that it *shouldn't* be any different to what happens
> when the release version gets bumped to 3.2.1 in the first maintenance
> release, but I really don't trust "should" all that much in a release
> management context :)
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>

-- 
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/

May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-February/108094.html below:

[Python-Dev] 3.2.0