Re: Python Policy: Things to consider for Stretch

[Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>]

Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> writes:

> I've taken a run through the current Python Policy to see where I
> think it needs to be updated for Stretch. The updates largely fall
> into four categories: […]

This is great to see, thank you Scott.

Where is the Git (I assume?) repository you're using for VCS of this
policy document?

> This is just my opinion on stuff I found. I'm interested in feedback
> on how these changes look and what else ought to be considered

I like what I see (modulo other discussions in this thread).


One small nit: the examples of what is included versus excluded of the
“scope” of a Python version reference. It used to say:

     as it seems reasonable to provide them.  (Note: For the scope of this
     document, Python versions are synonymous to feature releases, i.e.
     Python 2.7 and 2.7.1 are sub-minor versions of the same Python version
     2.7, but Python 2.6 and 2.7 are indeed different versions.)

The contrast “2.7 and 2.7.1 are […] the same Python version 2.7”, with
“2.6 and 2.7 are […] different versions”, uses version “2.7” in both
parts.

I think it's important to the example that an *identical* version is in
*both* arms of that contrast, to be clear what is being distinguished.

So in the re-write I'd advise again using an identical version in both parts:

     as it seems reasonable to provide them.  (Note: For the scope of this
     document, Python versions are synonymous to feature releases, i.e.
     Python 3.5 and 3.5.1 are sub-minor versions of the same Python version
     3.5, but Python 3.4 and 3.5 are indeed different versions.)

If I can know where to access the VCS repository I can make a patch for
that, if you like.

-- 
 \       “Come on, if your religion is so vulnerable that a little bit |
  `\           of disrespect is going to bring it down, it's not worth |
_o__)               believing in, frankly.” —Terry Gilliam, 2005-01-18 |
Ben Finney