2013/8/1 Peter FELECAN <[email protected]> > Yann Rouillard <[email protected]> writes: > > > What people need to understand is that a 2.6 non binary module can be > run by a 2.7 interpreter. The reverse is not always true. This is why I > proposed to replace 2.6 by 2.7 in our next transition from unstable to a > named catalog. >
I thought Maciej provided a counter-example with the range function where python 2.7 didn't run the code whereas python 2.6 worked. I may have missed something in this long thread, wasn't the example valid ? > > This is not to be confused with the major incompatibilities between 2.x > and 3.x where using a different prefix is required. > To keep thing consistent, I would prefer to have a CSWpy27- prefix if we have a CSWpy3- our CSWpy33- prefix. This way the user will not install a CSWpy- package while looking for a module for python 3. Yann
_______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
