Making code 2.1 compatible

[Michael Hudson]

"Donn Cave" <donn at u.washington.edu> writes:

> Quoth "Mark McEahern" <marklists at mceahern.com>:
> |>| did you know that 2.2 has been deemed the release targeted for 
> |>| stability by the pbf?
> |> 
> |> Where can I read about that?  I'm curious to know what they mean.
> |
> | I read about that here:
> |
> |   http://starship.python.net/crew/mwh/europython.html
> |
> | There doesn't appear to be a formal announcement here, yet:
> |
> |   http://www.python-in-business.org/
> 
> Interesting, but only in the sense of "tantalizing".  It reads
> like the author (Michael Hudson?) 

Yes.  I'm not good at mentioning my own name on my web pages...

> already knew about the basic idea, and assumed the reader does too.

Which parts confuse you?  Or has Tim cleared it up?

[Tim, later]
> If they don't, we do <wink> -- the volunteer bugfix-release Patch
> Czars so far have taken a strong "no new features!" stance.

Note that a selling point of the "no new features!" stance is a
reduction of the work required... every time I said "no" to a patch,
there was less fiddling with cvs to do.

Cheers,
M.

-- 
  I have no disaster recovery plan for black holes, I'm afraid.  Also
  please be aware that if it one looks imminent I will be out rioting
  and setting fire to McDonalds (always wanted to do that) and
  probably not reading email anyway.                     -- Dan Barlow