On 11/08/16 20:40, Fred Wright wrote:
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
On Aug 10, 2016, at 5:21 PM, Fred Wright <f...@fwright.net> wrote:
I don't consider Python 2.6 to be "cruft". Developers need many
versions of Python installed for testing, and that includes any
packages that are also needed. It's annoying to have to create local
versions of portfiles solely to add versions that are missing for no
substantive reason.
The substantive reason is that every additional version of CPython we
support is a maintenance burden, especially one that saw its last
feature release 6 years ago and its last bugfix release nearly 3 years
ago.
Well, leaving something alone that's working just fine is hardly much of a
maintenance burden.
On the other hand, whats the rationale for keeping 2.6, given 2.7 is the
official upstream production version of the 2.x series. What use case
requires 2.6 and cannot move to 2.7 ?
Chris
BTW, there's some erroneous information that making code compatible with
both Python 2 and Python 3 requires 2.7. I have yet to encounter any
issues with "polyglot" code per se on Python 2.6. Anything earlier is
definitely problematic, however.
Fred Wright
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
