Re: Release 0.20
Guenter Milde via Docutils-develop <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.docutils.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Dear Docutils developers, after the next round of "last minute fixes" I propose to freeze the repository and release the current state as next Docutils version. On 2023-04-25, Adam Turner wrote: > I have tested on Python 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, and 3.12.0a7 -- all > supported Python versions. Following [r9363], all tests pass with no > warnings and with ``-W error`` enabled. Excellent. Thank you. ... > Ok -- I have no strong feelings either way -- if Engelbert is happy to > release 0.20 with no 'rc1' stage then that works with me! I agree we > didn't get much feedback. I suggest either 0.20rc1 before the weekend or 0.20 after the weekend. Engelbert, could you decide (and tell us) which you prefer and can manage? > ... >>>> The API documentation "publisher.txt" now has the example >>>> output = bytes(publish_string(...)) >>>> (which depends on `OutputString` features). >>> Can we mark this feature as provisional? Personally, I don't think >>> that we should support this form of ``bytes`` conversion long-term, >>> and I see the ``OutputString`` as a transitional class, again not >>> one that will be around for a long time. >> OK. > I'll reply to this point in my reply to your other note [r9369] reverts the addition of `io.OutString` and the "auto_encode" argument for core.publish_string() and core.publish_from_docstring(). I hope this can give us a clean start for discussing a consensus on the desired end state of the "String I/O interface" and the best way to reach it. Thanks, Günter _______________________________________________ Docutils-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/docutils-develop Please use "Reply All" to reply to the list.