R. David Murray wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 at 22:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >>> I don't currently have an opinion on this backport proposal, but in >>> regard to this argument: if we do not do any 2.x releases after 2.7, >>> then over time the number of packages that can afford to drop 2.6 >>> support >>> will grow, yet many will need to retain 2.7 support for much longer. >> >> I don't think the argument applies to 2.7 as much as it applied to >> earlier releases: 2.7 will have a life time of 18 months perhaps (I >> think we still need to decide formally against 2.8, and also decide >> when to make the last 2.7 bug fix release). There is some likelihood > > I was under the impression that if 2.7 was the last release that it > would be maintained (ie: bugfixed) until we decided 3.x uptake was > "sufficient", and that that might be considerably longer than 18 months. > If that is not the case, then what you say is true.
I think that's as-yet undecided. My understanding was that we would decide, at some point, whether to create a 2.8 release or not, and if not, that 2.7 would be the final release. To me, this always implied that there wouldn't be any bug fix releases after 18 months, and no security releases after five years. If we would decide to continue doing 2.x releases, the we definitely wouldn't go beyond 2.9 (because there can't be a 2.10 release, numerically). At a rate of a release every 18 month, this would mean we would make bug fix releases for 2.x for no more than 5 years (from now). But I would really hope that we stop before 2.9. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
