proposal: remove codename #5450
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I quite enjoy coming up with codenames, but I'll do that whether or not we use them, so I'm fine with removing it. I think projects that use codenames mostly pick them at the start of a development cycle, so it's used up to the release, and they generally use a short distinctive name that you can use in conversation, like Debian 'jessie' or Ubuntu 'trusty'. 'An afternoon hack' takes longer to say than 'one point oh', so no-one ever really used it. |
|
3.0 can be called 'Orca' 😉 |
mattvonrocketstein
pushed a commit
to mattvonrocketstein/ipython
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2014
proposal: remove codename
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I'm not sure figuring out a silly codename for each release is worth anyone's time.
Since the RC is out and the release imminent and there hasn't been a proposal for 2.0, I think we can just remove it.