[Twisted-Python] I was looking for offhanded ways to improve us.

Glyph Lefkowitz glyph at twistedmatrix.com
Sun Apr 29 12:17:45 EDT 2001

On Saturday 28 April 2001 18:12, you wrote:
> Ok, 3 points.
> 1) I think 0.9.0 should be feature-complete with 1.0, and 0.9.* only be bug
> fixes, and all your current 0.9.* releases be 0.8.* releases.

The gimp-style versioning is intentional.  I think that 0.99.* indicates 
"slogging towards 1.0!!" whereas 0.9 seems like a decent release in its own 
right.  I'll vote (i.e. use my divine mandate to dictate) that we keep it 
that way :)

> 2) package-izing of web. I think this needs to be done (we have webconfig
> and webutils in twisted, and these should be web.config and web.utils).
> I've been bitching about this for a very long time. I think it should be
> done before 1.0. It makes sense to do it now, while the protocol handling
> part of web is being factored out into protocols.http.

The trouble is that webutils and webconfig are not logically "owned" by web.  
webutils could grow into a separate distribution; webconfig might just as 
logically be config.web.  I don't see a compelling reason for organizing them 
in a package yet.  (Something like twisted.reality may bear packagizing, 
since twisted.library *is* logically "owned" by reality).

Also, anything called "util" is basically crying out for refactoring.  
Perhaps web and reality should both be packages and both have a "library" 
subpackage?  I dunno.  Suggestions are welcome.

> 3) Maybe releases >1.0 should be a little more spread out numerically.
> Maybe not. I donno.

Well, there are 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3 releases in between, etc, that were not 

                      ______      __   __  _____  _     _
                     |  ____ |      \_/   |_____] |_____|
                     |_____| |_____  |    |       |     |
                     @ t w i s t e d m a t r i x  . c o m

More information about the Twisted-Python mailing list