2013/8/1 Peter FELECAN <[email protected]>: > Yann Rouillard <[email protected]> writes: > >> 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 ? > > The example referred to compiled code if my memory is good for something > in this hot weather...
No, it was just the source. range() in 2.6 accepts a float while in 2.7 it throws an exception. It was just an example to show that testing is required before you can change the interpreter version, and some form of a migration procedure is required. > BTW, we didn't decided on the delivery of .pyc and .pyo instead of > compiling them at installation time. And for this I'm sure that I > showed the proof. I think we've agreed to ship *.pyc in the package, because we will not share one .py file across two Python interpreters: we will provide one file for the 2.6 interpreter and one file for the 2.7 interpreter. >>> 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. > > First of all, the prefix is/should be CSWpy3 as Debian and tutti quanti. > > Having a CSWpy26- and CSWpy27- prefix is redundantly ugly... > > What about having CSWpy2- for the new packages being them 2.7 or > modulated for 2.6 and 2.7. The new packages will stub the previous > ones. This can be done by a scripted rebuild (easy to say, more manual > work intensive to do). Eventually we have a coherent, orthogonal > universe. Heh? Just for the sake of adding a "2"? I'd say no, let's keep it at CSWpy- and save ourselves and our users the churn of package renames. Maciej _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
