-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 618
PEP 703: Clearly differentiate free-threaded installers from regular #2336
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Hi @hugovk is this still needed/wanted? I could work on this after I wrap up my migration work? |
Yes, I think it will still be needed at some point. Although, we don't yet have any separate free-threaded installers for 3.13, and it's not entirely clear yet if we will for 3.13, or what form they will take. Something semi-related that would be useful, implement some form of "feature releases" boxes at the top, similar to Node.js and Go here: #2194 (comment) |
That sounds good. Can you assign this to me? #2419 |
I don't have any merge or triage rights in this repo :) You comment is enough. |
Turns out this is not needed, in the end we added options to the existing macOS and Windows installers, rather than creating separate installers for free-threaded builds 👍 |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
A clear and concise description of what the problem is.
Describe the solution you'd like
As part of the PEP 703 acceptance, the steering council said it will be very important to get feedback from the community, but to carefully note early builds are experimental:
We're not quite ready to distribute free-threaded installers, but when we are we'll need a way to share them.
The most obvious way is to include them in the release pages:
But we need to make sure they're very clearly marked as experimental, and not just with an "Experimental" note like the Windows installer (ARM64).
Maybe in another table, or something completely different.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Not show them on these pages, but still have the binaries available, and we link to them from blog or Discourse posts, or from FTP listings. This might suffice for the current Phase I (Experimental), but I think we'll need listings for Phase II (Supported-but-not-default).
Additional context
See also #2194, it seems many people install 32-bit Python on 64-bit Windows because 32-bit Python is first on the list and don't heed the "Recommended" note next to 64-bit Python.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: