richard.m.tew at gmail.com
Tue Mar 4 20:26:06 CET 2014
You mean like:
Python 3.2.5 Stackless 3.2.
It looks confusing. Better just to ditch the number I think.
On 3/5/14, Kristján Valur Jónsson <kristjan at ccpgames.com> wrote:
> why not just go with 3.2? Does anyone use this number at all anyway?
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: stackless-bounces at stackless.com [mailto:stackless-
>> bounces at stackless.com] On Behalf Of Richard Tew
>> Sent: 3. mars 2014 02:20
>> To: stackless at stackless.com
>> Subject: [Stackless] stackless_version.h
>> 3.1b3 060516 is kind of a magic number, maybe we could do away with it?
>> was going to bump it to 3.2, but decided it would be a little confusing.
>> Python 2.7.6r2 Stackless 3.1b3 060516 (default, Mar 3 2014, 15:11:44)
>> v.1500 32 bit (Intel)] on win32 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or
>> for more information.
>> Stackless mailing list
>> Stackless at stackless.com
> Stackless mailing list
> Stackless at stackless.com
More information about the Stackless