[Stackless] PEP 0404 and VS 2010 (python-dev)
richard.m.tew at gmail.com
Fri Nov 22 19:36:49 CET 2013
Look, by going on about this, I don't want to create complication. I
just think that "Stackless Python 2.8" is a much better name, and that
to use another name, only serves to introduce confusion on our end.
And Stackless as a term is already a minor problem for us, which is
another reason I would prefer we do not use that by itself. By this I
mean, we still get people out there who introduce Stackless Python to
people as a language that doesn't have a stack. If I would replace
any part of the name, it would be the "Stackless" part, but that
wouldn't solve the "PR nightmare" worry in any case and it is too late
in the day for the project to reasonably do that.
I propose this way forward:
- I've asked on python-dev for clarification on how "Stackless Python
2.8" can realistically be considered a PR nightmare.
- If they can give us valid reasons, we rename to "Stackless 2.8" to
prevent them from having this problem.
- If they cannot give us valid reasons, we just go with "Stackless
Python 2.8" and consider it a complete non-issue which we no longer
How does that sound?
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Christian Tismer <tismer at stackless.com> wrote:
> Hi Richard,
> sorry that I did not find that post. The threading feature of Thunderbird
> made me miss it.
> Great post, thank you for speaking up and giving all the pointers.
> On 22/11/13 10:17, Richard Tew wrote:
> I think you should do whatever you need to, to make this work.
> I've posted to python-dev expressing why I feel like their reaction is
> unreasonable, and unjustified.
> I think there is value in having the Python in the name. But if you
> need to ditch it to get on with things and to avoid the drama, then I
> guess it needs to happen.
> Maybe it is sufficient to avoid confusion of the poor majority of
> users by removing the name "Python" from exactly this one "Stackless 2.8"
> release and that's it.
> cheers -- chris
> Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I am not yet
> completely sure about the universe.
> Stackless mailing list
> Stackless at stackless.com
More information about the Stackless