mirror of https://github.com/python/cpython.git
Rewrites to section on new development process, after Usenet discussion
of the text
This commit is contained in:
parent
0b4e25d0c0
commit
d44dc3ca6f
|
@ -58,37 +58,42 @@ done between May and September.
|
||||||
\section{New Development Process}
|
\section{New Development Process}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The most important change in Python 2.0 may not be to the code at all,
|
The most important change in Python 2.0 may not be to the code at all,
|
||||||
but to how Python is developed.
|
but to how Python is developed: in May 2000 the Python developers
|
||||||
|
began using the tools made available by SourceForge for storing
|
||||||
|
source code, tracking bug reports, and managing the queue of patch
|
||||||
|
submissions. To report bugs or submit patches for Python 2.0, use the
|
||||||
|
bug tracking and patch manager tools available from Python's project
|
||||||
|
page, located at \url{http://sourceforge.net/projects/python/}.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In May of 2000, the Python CVS tree was moved to SourceForge.
|
The most important of the services now hosted at SourceForge is the
|
||||||
Previously, there were roughly 7 or so people who had write access to
|
Python CVS tree, the version-controlled repository containing the
|
||||||
the CVS tree, and all patches had to be inspected and checked in by
|
source code for Python. Previously, there were roughly 7 or so people
|
||||||
one of the people on this short list. Obviously, this wasn't very
|
who had write access to the CVS tree, and all patches had to be
|
||||||
scalable. By moving the CVS tree to SourceForge, it became possible
|
inspected and checked in by one of the people on this short list.
|
||||||
to grant write access to more people; as of September 2000 there were
|
Obviously, this wasn't very scalable. By moving the CVS tree to
|
||||||
27 people able to check in changes, a fourfold increase. This makes
|
SourceForge, it became possible to grant write access to more people;
|
||||||
possible large-scale changes that wouldn't be attempted if they'd have
|
as of September 2000 there were 27 people able to check in changes, a
|
||||||
to be filtered through the small group of core developers. For
|
fourfold increase. This makes possible large-scale changes that
|
||||||
example, one day Peter Schneider-Kamp took it into his head to drop
|
wouldn't be attempted if they'd have to be filtered through the small
|
||||||
K\&R C compatibility and convert the C source for Python to ANSI
|
group of core developers. For example, one day Peter Schneider-Kamp
|
||||||
C. After getting approval on the python-dev mailing list, he launched
|
took it into his head to drop K\&R C compatibility and convert the C
|
||||||
into a flurry of checkins that lasted about a week, other developers
|
source for Python to ANSI C. After getting approval on the python-dev
|
||||||
joined in to help, and the job was done. If there were only 5 people
|
mailing list, he launched into a flurry of checkins that lasted about
|
||||||
with write access, probably that task would have been viewed as
|
a week, other developers joined in to help, and the job was done. If
|
||||||
``nice, but not worth the time and effort needed'' and it would
|
there were only 5 people with write access, probably that task would
|
||||||
never have gotten done.
|
have been viewed as ``nice, but not worth the time and effort needed''
|
||||||
|
and it would never have gotten done.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
SourceForge also provides tools for tracking bug and patch
|
The shift to using SourceForge's services has resulted in a remarkable
|
||||||
submissions, and in combination with the public CVS tree, they've
|
increase in the speed of development. Patches now get submitted,
|
||||||
resulted in a remarkable increase in the speed of development.
|
commented on, revised by people other than the original submitter, and
|
||||||
Patches now get submitted, commented on, revised by people other than
|
bounced back and forth between people until the patch is deemed worth
|
||||||
the original submitter, and bounced back and forth between people
|
checking in. This didn't come without a cost: developers now have
|
||||||
until the patch is deemed worth checking in. This didn't come without
|
more e-mail to deal with, more mailing lists to follow, and special
|
||||||
a cost: developers now have more e-mail to deal with, more mailing
|
tools had to be written for the new environment. For example,
|
||||||
lists to follow, and special tools had to be written for the new
|
SourceForge sends default patch and bug notification e-mail messages
|
||||||
environment. For example, SourceForge sends default patch and bug
|
that are completely unhelpful, so Ka-Ping Yee wrote an HTML
|
||||||
notification e-mail messages that are completely unhelpful, so Ka-Ping
|
screen-scraper that sends more useful messages.
|
||||||
Yee wrote an HTML screen-scraper that sends more useful messages.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The ease of adding code caused a few initial growing pains, such as
|
The ease of adding code caused a few initial growing pains, such as
|
||||||
code was checked in before it was ready or without getting clear
|
code was checked in before it was ready or without getting clear
|
||||||
|
@ -136,10 +141,6 @@ and are also available in HTML form from
|
||||||
there are 25 PEPS, ranging from PEP 201, ``Lockstep Iteration'', to
|
there are 25 PEPS, ranging from PEP 201, ``Lockstep Iteration'', to
|
||||||
PEP 225, ``Elementwise/Objectwise Operators''.
|
PEP 225, ``Elementwise/Objectwise Operators''.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
To report bugs or submit patches for Python 2.0, use the bug tracking
|
|
||||||
and patch manager tools available from the SourceForge project page,
|
|
||||||
at \url{http://sourceforge.net/projects/python/}.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% ======================================================================
|
% ======================================================================
|
||||||
\section{Unicode}
|
\section{Unicode}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@ -1157,7 +1158,7 @@ these modules.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The authors would like to thank the following people for offering
|
The authors would like to thank the following people for offering
|
||||||
suggestions on drafts of this article: Mark Hammond, Gregg Hauser,
|
suggestions on drafts of this article: Mark Hammond, Gregg Hauser,
|
||||||
Fredrik Lundh, Detlef Lannert, Skip Montanaro, Vladimir Marangozov,
|
Fredrik Lundh, Detlef Lannert, Aahz Maruch, Skip Montanaro, Vladimir
|
||||||
Guido van Rossum, and Neil Schemenauer.
|
Marangozov, Guido van Rossum, Neil Schemenauer, and Russ Schmidt.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\end{document}
|
\end{document}
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue