Python 3 alpha/beta status criteria?

[ghost]

What's our criteria?

With the tests passing on Linux, and almost entirely passing on Windows, I wanna know what we do next :)

I'm personally not sure, except for #2058. That's not really a showstopper though.

[ghost]

I'm finally asking this now, because everything on my local todo list is finally done today (except getting some version of #2151 merged)

[sampsyo]

Woohoo!

Roughly, I usually think of these definitions:

• Alpha: Still very much in development (i.e., right now).
• Beta: Nothing obvious we know of that's outstanding, but there are still plenty of bugs we don't know about (i.e., the status I imagine for 1.4.0).
• Final: We're pretty confident it's safe for normal people to use.

[ghost]

So what do you see as left in alpha beyond #2151?

[sampsyo]

Nothing that I can see—it seems ready after that! How about you; any lingering concerns?

[ghost]

so, now that I finally replicated what I saw locally with non utf-8 locales.. We could try to get these fixed. See the build output in #2158

I did learn something because of that though! If you want non utf-8 locales (other than C) on at least debian and ubuntu, you have to force it by specifying say en_us.iso-8859-1 as en_US just generates utf-8 locales.

[ghost]

Can you look into #2158 ? It'd be cool to have that fixed for 1.4.0.

[arcresu]

Is there anything left to do here? It looks like this can probably be closed now.

[sampsyo]

Indeed—using Python 3 has been our recommendation for a while, despite a couple of lingering Python 3 bugs, the most significant of which is #2607 (which is unfortunately also the hardest to fix). I could imagine dropping Python 2 support at any time, assuming we announce the transition ahead of time.