On 10/2/2015 3:41 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
On Oct 2, 2015, at 10:20, R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:24:18 -0400, Ned Deily <n...@acm.org> wrote:
Another change has been to add a fourth beta and drop the third
release candidate. My gut feeling from the past several releases
is that a lot of feature code does not get checked in until close
to the b1 feature code cutoff so that extending the beta phase
should result in more testing exposure for all features. And I
would like to reduce the amount of churn during the release
candidate phase: a worthy goal is to make no changes after rc1,
so that an rc2 would be be made only if absolutely necessary.
I would like to be wrong, but I think this is unrealistic. The
reality seems to be that there are a significant number of people
(especially on the Windows side, if I'm guessing correctly) who do
not test until we get to RC1. IIRC we had a number of changes
between RC1 and RC2, and a non-trivial number of changes between
RC2 and RC3 this time around.
I would like to be right but we won't know for sure either way until
we get there. In 3.5.0, there were major changes to the Windows
installation process and there is still some fallout from those
changes that will be addressed in 3.5.1. I'm hopeful that most of
those issues were one-time things and that we can also learn from
3.5.0. I plan to emphasize earlier testing of the betas and want to
set expectations that, when we call something a release candidate, we
really intend to be able to release it. If it's not ready, then we
may need to do another beta. Release candidate releases are costly
for all involved. I'd like to see us try real hard to keep them to a
minimum.
I agree with making the effort. I believe there have been releases with
just 2 rcs. The schedule looks good to me.
tjr
_______________________________________________
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
