[Python-Dev] Timing for Py2.4 (original) (raw)

Raymond Hettinger python at rcn.com
Sun Mar 28 00:33:20 EST 2004

Raymond Hettinger wrote: > The PEP for Py2.4 got updated and the dates were pushed back to > September. Is there any reason that we couldn't get a first alpha out > in early June or late May?

[Anthony]

I really want to give ast-compiler and generator expressions time to bake. genexps in particular have the potential to have all sorts of nasty corner cases.

Once we release 2.4.0, changing genexps to fix any previously- unforseen uglies is going to be much, much harder.

[Tim Peters]

The ast-branch compiler is likely to have its share of subtle glitches. They may be more serious, since it looks like "the plan" for genexps now is to say that genexps work -- whatever they happen to do .

Raymond, the 2.4 PEP was updated after a 2.4 planning meeting during the PyCon sprints on Sunday. There was plenty of debate there.

The discussion took place before we learned that our most active developer won't be distracted by pesky board duties ;-) So I would like to re-open the discussion on the timing for Py2.4.

My thoughts on the above are:

  1. "Baking" is not happening. There are only a tiny handful of us actively developing and using Py2.4. Move the release date back five months and that's five more months that no one is looking at the product. The best way to get people exercise the code base is to have an alpha release.

As evidence, look at the features I've added over the last nine months. I get feedback while they are being developed and a few days afterwards. After that, there is zero feedback (okay, Guido once asked a question about set comparisons, but that was it).

  1. As it stands now, the current CVS is the most stable it has ever been prior to an alpha release. It is already in excellent shape and is chock full of features and optimizations that people can be putting to work right now.

  2. For folks who haven't been actively using Py2.4, a little FUD is natural. However, passage of time will not make that go away. The only valid reason I can see for a much later release date is if someone has a specific plan to do a major piece of development or review during the summer months. Right now, I know of no one who has made that commitment. Worse, if you move the data back far enough, then folks are less likely to set aside time now to even look at the current CVS, much less contribute to it.

  3. If some feature set turns out to be worrisome, I would rather delay it for Py2.5 than hold up Py2.4 indefinitely. The AST people know best whether their work is fit for commitment. If it's not ready, then let it cook on its own time. Basically, it's ready when it's ready.

  4. Genexps won't be committed until thoroughly tested and the code thoroughly reviewed. All of the posted examples will be tried and matched against expectations. I will take every script I've ever written and substitute genexps for list comps and then run the test suites. IOW, from the very first, I expect genexps to be more solid than most of the Py2.2 features ever were. Also, unlike new-style class gizmos, most everybody gets the idea of genexps -- that means they will be more thoroughly understood and tried out by more people once an alpha goes out.

  5. Since Py2.2 went out, we've had a much better discipline of writing thorough unittest suites and good documentation (that is why the new Py2.3 modules had so few bug reports; except for logging, most of the bug reports are for things predating Py2.3). Walter has been systematically increasing coverage so we are on much more solid ground than ever.

Does anyone have a good reason that the first alpha cannot go out in May?

We don't have to feature freeze (i.e. Decimal can go in when it's ready). If an area of concern surfaces, we can always go through additional alpha/beta cycles.

Raymond

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list