Message70763
| Author |
akuchling |
| Recipients |
akuchling, benjamin.peterson, georg.brandl, gvanrossum |
| Date |
2008年08月05日.19:50:24 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.03265518 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1217965826.03.0.439295715507.issue2305@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I agree; we don't want to require people to read the 2.6 document, and
then the 3.0 document to get a complete picture.
Besides, the organization of the 2.x documents may not be suitable for
the 3.0 document. The 2.x documents are organized by PEP, then a
section for miscellaneous language changes, then a section for library
changes. For 3.0, you probably want to do all language changes in one
section, ignoring how they were broken up into PEPs, then a section on
the library reorganization, and then maybe sections on using 2to3
or porting C extensions.
It's certainly OK with me to copy text from the 2.6 document into the
3.0 one, if some of the text is useful. |
|