On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:21:11 -0400 > Steve Holden <st...@holdenweb.com> wrote: >> >> The question of when to declare 3.x the "official" release is >> interesting. I am inclined to say "when there's at least one other >> implementation at 3.2" - even if CPython is then at 3.3 or 3.4. > > I don't think that's a good criterion. 95% of Python users (my > guesstimate) are on CPython, so whether or not alternative > implementations are up-to-date isn't critically important. > > 3.1 had some warts left (*), but 3.2 should really be a high-quality > release. Many bugs have been squashed, small improvements done > (including additional features in the stdlib, or the new GIL), and > unicode support has been polished again thanks to Martin's and Victor's > efforts. Not only will it be as robust as any 2.x release (**), but it's > also more pleasant to use, and there's upwards compatibility for many > years to come. > > (*) some of them fixed in the 3.1 maintenance branch > > (**) with a couple of lacking areas such as the email module, I suppose > > Regards > > Antoine.
+0.5 The one area I have concerns about is the state of WSGI and other web-oriented modules. These issues have been brought up by Armin and others, but given a lack of a clear path forward (bugs, peps, etc), I don't think it's fair to use it as a measurement of overall quality. jesse _______________________________________________ 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
