Skip to content

Conversation

@ncoghlan
Copy link
Contributor

@ncoghlan ncoghlan commented Jul 23, 2019

  • explicitly discuss potential implications for CI and
    deployment management follow a useful discussion
    with Barry Warsaw
  • propose locking down even provisional APIs once
    a given release series is feature complete
  • note that delay in adopting major feature releases
    may prevent PEP 596 from having the desired
    effect of reducing feature delivery latency
  • rephrase the section about Python 3.10 vs 4.0
    to make it clear that the PEP isn't proposing
    releasing 4.0 after 3.9, just discussing the impact
    the different choice of version number would have
    on the proposal
  • reference Anthony Sottile's "Python 3.10" compatibility
    testing project

Also rephrase the section about Python 3.10 vs 4.0
to make it clearer that the PEP isn't *proposing*
releasing 4.0 after 3.9, just discussing the impact
the different choice of version number would have
on the proposal.
@ncoghlan ncoghlan changed the title PEP 598: Further discuss testing implications PEP 598: CI implications, provisional APIs, and other tweaks Jul 23, 2019
@ncoghlan ncoghlan changed the title PEP 598: CI implications, provisional APIs, and other tweaks PEP 598: CI implications, provisional APIs, other tweaks Jul 23, 2019
@brettcannon brettcannon reopened this Jul 24, 2019
@ncoghlan ncoghlan merged commit cd7773e into python:master Jul 26, 2019
@ncoghlan ncoghlan deleted the pep-598-further-discuss-ci-implications branch July 26, 2019 09:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants