RetroSearch Browse

Tue Mar 25 09:37:52 CET 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133478.html

On 25 March 2014 08:26, Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote:
> Exactly the same. If someone wants to distribute SEPython (that
> someone might be python.org itself, or ActiveState, or anyone else who
> has an interest in it), they're welcome to do so; and it could be done
> either as an all-in-one that packages all of CPython, or as an add-on;
> either way would work just as well, but the former would be cleaner.

Reading this I suspect we're mostly in agreement but having trouble
communicating. My understanding of your point is simply that you don't
want python-dev to 'bless' either of the 2.7 releases proposed as
_the_ 2.7 release, instead pushing that choice on to people
distributing Python. I can get behind that plan so long as the source
code releases are named in such a way that people are either a) forced
to make a choice; or b) defaulted to secure 2.7.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133478.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 466: Proposed policy change for handling network security enhancements