On 8 Jan 2014 10:36, "Larry Hastings" <la...@hastings.org> wrote: > > On 01/07/2014 06:06 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> Addressing the key remaining barriers to migration for existing Python 2 users would be an excellent objective to attain before we end upstream support for Python 2.7, but it's one that would be better addressed by a slightly shorter dev cycle than normal for 3.5 than it would be by falling into the "just one more feature" trap for Python 3.4. > > > I was thinking about that myself. If we said in advance what features we were shooting for, and it wasn't overly ambitious, we could do a release in six months. No problem. > > Do we know of any (other) big projects waiting to happen for 3.5?
Extending the PEP 451 import model to allow true reloading of extension modules and the PEP 422 replacement for dynamic metaclass definitions. Also some tweaks to standard stream configuration, support for changing the encoding of a stream and a public API for codecs to declare "I am not a text encoding". I suspect a 6 month cycle would confuse users and inconvenience redistributors, but a 12—17 month cycle so 3.5 is published before 2.7 enters security fix only mode would make a *lot* of sense. Cheers, Nick. > > And has a consensus about byte formatting really coalesced that quickly? > > > /arry > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers >
_______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
