RetroSearch Browse

Tue Apr 3 13:45:13 EDT 2018 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2018-April/152601.html

On 2018-04-03 18:09, Paul G wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/03/2018 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 at 07:39 Paul G <paul at ganssle.io> wrote:
> 
>> Paul's point is that he knows e.g. code working in 3.6.0 will work when he
>> upgrades to 3.6.5, and if his code is warning-free  and works with all
>> __future__ statements in 3.6 that it will work fine in 3.7. With CalVer you
>> could make a similar promise if you keep the major version the year of
>> release and then keep our feature/bugfix number promise like we already
>> have, but at that point who cares about the year?
> 
> I think it is reasonable to use a scheme like this:
> 
> YY.MM.patch
> 
Surely that should be:

YYYY.MM.patch

[snip]

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2018-April/152601.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python version numbers