This document describes the post Python 2.0 development and
release schedule. According to this schedule, Python 2.1 will be
released in April 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 future release dates
[bugfix release dates go here]
Past release dates:
17-Apr-2001: 2.1 final release
15-Apr-2001: 2.1 release candidate 2
13-Apr-2001: 2.1 release candidate 1
23-Mar-2001: Python 2.1 beta 2 release
02-Mar-2001: First 2.1 beta release
02-Feb-2001: Python 2.1 alpha 2 release
22-Jan-2001: Python 2.1 alpha 1 release
16-Oct-2000: Python 2.0 final release
Open issues for Python 2.0 beta 2
Add a default unit testing framework to the standard library.
Guidelines for making changes for Python 2.1
The guidelines and schedule will be revised based on discussion in
the email@example.com 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 firstname.lastname@example.org
and email@example.com 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.
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
- 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
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
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.