[Python-Dev] release cadence (was: Request for CPython 3.5.3 release)

[Brett Cannon]

On Sun, Jul 3, 2016, 13:43 Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 3 July 2016 at 21:22, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> > Topic 2
> > =======
> > Independent releases of the stdlib could be done, although if we break
> the
> > stdlib up into individual repos then it shifts the conversation as
> > individual modules could simply do their own releases independent of the
> big
> > stdlib release. Personally I don't see a point of doing a stdlib release
> > separate from CPython, but I could see doing a more frequent release of
> > CPython where the only thing that changed is the stdlib itself (but I
> don't
> > know if that would even alleviate the RM workload).
>
> The one major downside of independent stdlib releases is that it
> significantly increases the number of permutations of things 3rd
> parties have to support. It can be hard enough to get a user to report
> the version of Python they are having an issue with - to get them to
> report both python and stdlib version would be even trickier. And
> testing against all the combinations, and deciding which combinations
> are supported, becomes a much bigger problem.
>
> Furthermore, pip/setuptools are just getting to the point of allowing
> for dependencies conditional on Python version. If independent stdlib
> releases were introduced, we'd need to implement dependencies based on
> stdlib version as well - consider depending on a backport of a new
> module if the user has an older stdlib version that doesn't include
> it.
>
> Changing the principle that the CPython version is a well-defined
> label for a specific language level and stdlib, is a major change with
> very wide implications, and I don't see sufficient benefits to justify
> it. On the other hand, simply decoupling the internal development
> cycles for the language and the stdlib (or independent stdlib
> modules), without adding extra "release" cycles, is not that big a
> deal - in many ways, we do that already with projects like asyncio.
>


This last bit is what I would advocate if we broke the stdlib out unless an
emergency patch release is warranted for a specific module (e.g. like
asyncio that started this discussion). Obviously backporting is its own
thing.

-Brett


> Paul
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160703/fd0a3625/attachment.html>