On 26 January 2014 22:57, Serhiy Storchaka <storch...@gmail.com> wrote: > 25.01.14 18:14, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла): > >> I don't think this is a killer feature that would deserve an extension >> of the release cycle. The feature freeze period is meant for bug fixing, >> not to shoehorn the latest bangs and whistles. Normally the whole Derby >> thing should already have waited for 3.5; in hindsight it would probably >> have been better to do just that. > > > There is at least one benefit from Derby: it have exhibited many errors in > already clinicalized code and in pydoc and inspect modules (and in Argument > Clinic itself).
Right, I think the Derby provided valuable experience, but I also now think Antoine's right that we should postponing any further conversions until 3.5, and focus on cleaning up both the existing conversions, as well as the technical details of working with Argument Clinic. Specifically, I think we want to have the following in place for 3.4: 1. Larry's patch to make the Argument Clinic signature markers more robust (http://bugs.python.org/issue20326) 2. Generating separate clinic files by default 3. Integrating clinic into "make patchcheck", similar to the reindent.py integration (http://bugs.python.org/issue20264) 4. Adding a commit hook that ensures clinic files have been regenerated prior to commit/push Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
