[Python-Dev] Re: Stability and change (original) (raw)

Paul Svensson paul@svensson.org
Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:13:51 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Alex Martelli wrote:

On Monday 08 April 2002 07:38 pm, Guido van Rossum wrote: ...

> It seems to me that duplicating (in your example) 2.3.8 to 2.4.0 > (and using 2.5.0 as the new baseline for further experimentation) > would be a very clear signal in this sense.

If the community likes the even/odd distinction enough. I've heard mixed feelings. I'm neutral on the odd/even distinction -- all it has for it is that a number of people are used to it from Linux. But SOMEthing more remarkable that "up to 2.3.N experimental, 2.3.(N+1) and on stable" is needed -- a different name, a different major release, whatever. If we can come up with something better than parity of minor release number, I'll personally cheer... I just can't think of anything better right now. Comparison of microrelease with some arbitrary threshold changing by minor.major is worse, though -- not a clear signal at all.

Why not take advantage of the "well known fact" that any software release ending in ".0" is not to be trusted ?

Make X.Y.0.N the experimental branch, settling down to X.Y.1 as the final stable release, following up with X.Y.Z as bugfix-only releases, and the next round of experimentals continuing from X.(Y+1).0.0.

This is almost as simple as the "just call it stable when it is" proposal, while still being even more obvious than the odd/even approach.

/Paul