PEP 226, Python 2.1 Release Schedule, Jeremy Hylton
This commit is contained in:
Barry Warsaw
parent
5b4565c9b8
commit
119d3520d7
|
|
@ -53,6 +53,8 @@ Index
|
|||
SF 223 pep-0223.txt Change the Meaning of \x Escapes Peters
|
||||
S 224 pep-0224.txt Attribute Docstrings Lemburg
|
||||
SD 225 pep-0225.txt Elementwise/Objectwise Operators Zhu, Lielens
|
||||
I 226 pep-0226.txt Python 2.1 Release Schedule Hylton
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Key
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
|
|||
PEP: 226
|
||||
Title: Python 2.1 Release Schedule
|
||||
Version: $Revision$
|
||||
Author: Jeremy Hylton <jeremy@beopen.com>
|
||||
Status: Incomplete
|
||||
Type: Informational
|
||||
Created: 16-Oct-2000
|
||||
Python-Version: 2.1
|
||||
Post-History:
|
||||
|
||||
Abstract
|
||||
|
||||
This document describes the post Python 2.0 development and
|
||||
release schedule. According to this schedule, Python 2.1 will be
|
||||
released in mid-March of 2001. The schedule primarily concerns
|
||||
itself with PEP-size items. Small bug fixes and changes will
|
||||
occur up until the first beta release.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Tentative Release Schedule
|
||||
|
||||
16-Oct-2000: Python 2.0 final release
|
||||
|
||||
These dates represent goals, not commitments.
|
||||
|
||||
16-Dec-2000: 2.1 PEPs ready for review
|
||||
01-Feb-2001: First 2.1 beta release
|
||||
16-Mar-2001: 2.1 final release
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Guidelines for making changes for Python 2.1
|
||||
|
||||
The guidelines and schedule will be revised based on discussion in
|
||||
the python-dev@python.org mailing list.
|
||||
|
||||
The PEP system was instituted late in the Python 2.0 development
|
||||
cycle and many changes did not follow the process described in PEP
|
||||
1. The development process for 2.1, however, will follow the PEP
|
||||
process as documented.
|
||||
|
||||
The first eight weeks following 2.0 final will be the design and
|
||||
review phase. By the end of this period, any PEP that is proposed
|
||||
for 2.1 should be ready for review. This means that the PEP is
|
||||
written and discussion has occurred on the python-dev@python.org
|
||||
and python-list@python.org mailing lists.
|
||||
|
||||
The next six weeks will be spent reviewing the PEPs and
|
||||
implementing and testing the accepted PEPs. When this period
|
||||
stops, we will end consideration of any incomplete PEPs. Near the
|
||||
end of this period, there will be a feature freeze where any small
|
||||
features not worthy of a PEP will not be accepted.
|
||||
|
||||
Before the final release, we will have six weeks of beta testing
|
||||
and a release candidate or two.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Bug fix releases before 2.1
|
||||
|
||||
We may have to issue Python 2.0.1 for critical bug fixes. If we
|
||||
need to issue a bug fix release, we will use a CVS branch.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
General guidelines for submitting patches and making changes
|
||||
|
||||
Use good sense when committing changes. You should know what we
|
||||
mean by good sense or we wouldn't have given you commit privileges
|
||||
<0.5 wink>. Some specific examples of good sense include:
|
||||
|
||||
- Do whatever the dictator tells you.
|
||||
|
||||
- Discuss any controversial changes on python-dev first. If you
|
||||
get a lot of +1 votes and no -1 votes, make the change. If you
|
||||
get a some -1 votes, think twice; consider asking Guido what he
|
||||
thinks.
|
||||
|
||||
- If the change is to code you contributed, it probably makes
|
||||
sense for you to fix it.
|
||||
|
||||
- If the change affects code someone else wrote, it probably makes
|
||||
sense to ask him or her first.
|
||||
|
||||
- You can use the SourceForge (SF) Patch Manager to submit a patch
|
||||
and assign it to someone for review.
|
||||
|
||||
Any significant new feature must be described in a PEP and
|
||||
approved before it is checked in.
|
||||
|
||||
Any significant code addition, such as a new module or large
|
||||
patch, must include test cases for the regression test and
|
||||
documentation. A patch should not be checked in until the tests
|
||||
and documentation are ready.
|
||||
|
||||
If you fix a bug, you should write a test case that would have
|
||||
caught the bug.
|
||||
|
||||
If you commit a patch from the SF Patch Manager or fix a bug from
|
||||
the Jitterbug database, be sure to reference the patch/bug number
|
||||
in the CVS log message. Also be sure to change the status in the
|
||||
patch manager or bug database (if you have access to the bug
|
||||
database).
|
||||
|
||||
It is not acceptable for any checked in code to cause the
|
||||
regression test to fail. If a checkin causes a failure, it must
|
||||
be fixed within 24 hours or it will be backed out.
|
||||
|
||||
All contributed C code must be ANSI C. If possible check it with
|
||||
two different compilers, e.g. gcc and MSVC.
|
||||
|
||||
All contributed Python code must follow Guido's Python style
|
||||
guide. http://www.python.org/doc/essays/styleguide.html
|
||||
|
||||
It is understood that any code contributed will be released under
|
||||
an Open Source license. Do not contribute code if it can't be
|
||||
released this way.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Local Variables:
|
||||
mode: indented-text
|
||||
indent-tabs-mode: nil
|
||||
End:
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue