On Monday 05 May 2014 09:54:40 Richard Heck wrote:
> If there are, at that time, cases where 2.7 is not going to be 
> available, then we can package Python ourselves with the binary, as we 
> already do on Windows.
> 
> What's the reason to require 3.3+? (I'm not familiar with developments 
> here.)
> 
> Richard

Some sort of compromise. :-)

Think about it as the surprise test paradox:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox

The question regarding which is the minimum version of python 3 to support is 
more or less like this:

 * python 3.0 was the first implementation and it has some "features" that were 
later restored to behave as python 2.x

 * python 3.1 is a iterative improvement over 3.0 and definitively a better 
choice than 3.0

 * the same can be said about python 3.2

 * and python 3.3, where for example the unicode strings u"" were re-enacted 
after being missing from the previous three releases.

 * python 3.4 is even a better release in terms of porting code from python 2.7

 * python 3.5 will be an even better to help to the porting effect.

So the ideal, IMHO, would be to based as the minimal version for python 3 the 
current 3.4, as a second best to use 3.3 as the starting point.

In terms of the support going back to 3.2 at least in terms of linux, every 
distribution that supports python 3.2 also supports python 2.7 so there is no 
gain supporting 3.2.

The main argument here is heuristic. I hope that this makes some sense. :-)
-- 
José Abílio

Reply via email to