On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Lennart Regebro<[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/7/24 Tarek Ziadé <[email protected]>: >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Ronald Oussoren<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> I agree with Lennart that a 2.x only release would be better, especially >>> because it would be possible to do a 0.7 alpha/beta release short after the >>> stable 0.6 release. >> >> Notice that 0.7 will rename the setuptools package, the >> pkg_resources.py module, and the easy_install script >> >> Meaning that if we don't add py3 support in the 0.6.x series, people >> will *have* to rename their imports if they want to >> use it under Python 3. > > Yeah, but is that a problem, as the renamed version will exist for > Python 2 as well, I assume?
no, it just changes the constraints : 0.6 : python 2 + no renaming 0.7 : python 2 or 3 + renaming or 0.6 : python 2 or 3 + no renaming 0.7 : python 2 or 3 + renaming > > > In any case, I have no strong opinion on whether 3.x support comes in > 0.6 or 0.7. > me neither, so let's drop that for 0.6. The work left for 0.6 is: - writing the zc.buildout bootstrap with a patch (zc.buildout.buildout.boostrap needs to be patched :() - finish the tests under various environments (I didn't test too much under win32) (help welcome :)) So the release should be pushed around the 5th or 6th, _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
