Stefan Behnel wrote: > However, the above doesn't answer the question if we should distinguish > between potentially dangerous changes (that we implement because we can or > because we need them, and have to put somewhere) and those that are safe > enough to go into the next release. I would like to have something like a > stable release series of Cython that other projects could depend on. I was > having a pretty hard time in the past telling people that they must build > lxml with /this/ Cython version instead of /that/ one. > That's my concern too.
> Being able to hold certain changes back will definitely help us in getting > releases out a lot faster than 0.11. What about a separate cython-0.12 > branch only for non-0.11 changes, next to a 'somewhat' safe cython-devel? > When a major change is required, we can push it there instead of > cython-devel, start working on it and have others test it while we can > still release 0.11.x from cython-devel. It doesn't need to be up-to-date > with cython-devel all the time (just when we push changes), and we can > always import certain changes into cython-devel if we think we can't wait > for 0.12. Or maybe "cython-unstable" would be a more generic name. > +1 to cython-devel and cython-unstable. Dag Sverre _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
