From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NoKBs-00026C-O4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 17:22:56 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 641BEE0859; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 17:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A05DE0851 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 17:22:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [83.146.207.236] (dyn-207-236-dsl.vsp.fi [83.146.207.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83C861B40E9 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 17:22:46 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4B93E311.9040403@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2010 19:32:01 +0200 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100213 Thunderbird/3.0.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item References: <201003041923.17749.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <4B902321.4020906@gentoo.org> <20100307171147.GL30005@halcy0n.com> In-Reply-To: <20100307171147.GL30005@halcy0n.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 369ac882-9302-4f1e-b8cf-bb801a3031d2 X-Archives-Hash: 8fea7d8d85642df6c424025990a1919e On 03/07/2010 07:11 PM, Mark Loeser wrote: > Sebastian Pipping said: >> On 03/04/10 19:22, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: >>> All problems, which were blocking stabilization of Python 3, have been fixed. >>> Stabilization of Python 3.1.2 is currently scheduled on 2010-04-19. >> >> #python on Freenode still reads "It's too early to use Python 3.x". >> Are they wrong? > > I'd believe them. > >> Are we at a point already where we can feed 90% of the Python 2.x code >> out there to Python 3 without problems? > > Doesn't seem that way. > >> Has QA given their blessing to this? > > Absolutely not. Its actually the opposite. Until 90+% of the tree just > works with the new version of python, it should not be stabilized. The > stable tree should all Just Work together. Stabilizing python-3 at this > point would be the equivalent of me stabilizing gcc-4.5 after its been > in the tree for a few months and nothing else works with it. Sure, gcc > works just fine, but it can't compile half of the tree. > > I hope everyone can see that this is a terrible idea and of no use to > our stable users. If a stable user really needs Python-3, they will > have the technical ability to unmask it and use it properly. > +1 no need to stabilize experimental python, not even convinced it should be in ~arch yet (but package.masked for testing)