Thanks for the clarifications.
So will we see extra ARC cases for the extras as they update to 2.5?
(In my opinion, it would be nice to just grant a blanket case approving
such an upgrade ahead of schedule, with cases only required when
incompatibilities are introduced. I'm not sure any mechanism exists to
do that, but I guess self-review cases could be used.)
- Garrett
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 12:14 -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
>> 1) Does Python versioning "make sense" here? I.e. is Python 2.5 largely
>> compatible with 2.4, and is it the case that developers should start
>> using the new version? (Put another way, is there any reason that
>> developers should be building new programs against 2.4 after 2.5
>> integrates?)
>>
>
> Yes. Python itself comes with a large number of modules, however
> there are a lot of extra modules and bindings that we add on top.
> For example libxml2-python, wrappers for most the GNOME libraries,
> etc. It will take time to make all these modules available for
> both 2.4 and 2.5. At that point existing python programs can
> all move to 2.5 and 2.4 can be phased out.
>
>
>> 2) Assuming that there are no surprises in the question above, wouldn't
>> it make more sense to upgrade 2.4 to "Uncommitted Obsolete" instead of
>> "Uncommitted"? (I.e. discourage new users from using 2.4 and direct
>> them to 2.5 instead.)
>>
>
> It should be made Obsolete when all extra Python are delivered
> for Python 2.5. I expect that to happen around the time the
> Python 2.6 case is submitted (2.6 is currently in beta).
>
>
>> 3) Is the project planning to undertake an effort to upgrade any Python
>> 2.4 dependents delivered by OpenSolaris to Python 2.5? (Either as part
>> of this project, or as part of a follow on effort?)
>>
>
> Yes, as a follow-on effort.
>
>
>> Thanks. (FWIW, I think its unlikely that any answers to any of the
>> questions are going to negatively affect any decision to deliver Python
>> 2.5. I'm more interested in what happens to Python 2.4, and what
>> precedent we might be setting, if any, when Python 2.6, 2.7... etc.
>> comes out.)
>>
>
> We actually have a precedent: we moved from 2.3 to 2.4 in the past.
> S10 GA had 2.3. It now delivers both 2.3 and 2.4, 2.3 was declared
> Obsolete when 2.4 integrated and then 2.3 was removed from Nevada.
> We are going to follow a similar pattern.
>
> Thanks,
> Laca
>
>
>
