On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 02:26:06PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > John Keeping <j...@keeping.me.uk> writes: >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:25:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> These early versions may not be unstable in the "this does not >>> behave as specified in the language specification for 3.x" sense, >>> but for the purpose of running scripts meant to be executable by >>> both 2.x and 3.x series, the early 3.x versions are not as good as >>> later versions where Python folks started making deliberate effort >>> to support them. >> >> As far as I'm aware (and having reviewed the release notes for 3.1, 3.2 >> and 3.3 as well as the planned features for 3.4), Unicode literals are >> the only feature to have been added that was intended to make it easier >> to support Python 2 and 3 in the same codebase. > > So there may be some other incompatibility lurking that we may run > into later?
I doubt it - enough projects are running on Python 2 and 3 now that I doubt there's anything unexpected left to hit. >> Given that no code currently on pu uses Unicode literals, I don't see a >> reason to specify a minimum version of Python 3 since we're already >> restricting ourselves to features in 2.6. > > OK, at least that reasoning need to be kept somewhere, either in the > documentation of in the log message. I'll put it in the log message when I send this as a proper patch. John -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html