On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:04:24PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Joachim Schipper wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 05:00:19PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
> > > hi,
> > >
> > > is there any reason to keep 2.5 around and specially as the default?
> > > 2.6 has been stable for some time now and all the ports should work with
> > > it. itoh, 2.5 is not maintained anymore except for some sporadic security
> > > updates.
> > > having to check your ports against 2.5 and 2.6 is time consuming (I'm
> > > not
> > > considering 2.4 as should only used for zope), but unfortunately is
> > > required
> > > for a number of reasons.
> > > so i propose to remove 2.5 and apply the diff below. this also removes
> > > mentions to 2.3 and updates the comments to mention other ports hardcoding
> > > the python version.
> > > comments? objections? oks?
> >
> > As others have said, moving to 2.6 makes a lot of sense; but if you are
> > e.g. developing software in Python, having 2.5 around is useful for
> > compatibility testing. So ports wouldn't need to be tested against 2.5,
> > but it shouldn't be deleted either.
>
> ugh? if we have 2.5 in the tree, even if it's not the default we should
> be testing with it. like we test 2.6 at the moment even when it's not the
> default. why would that change?
I was under the impression that 2.6 was tested because OpenBSD wants to
move to that version. Python 2.4 is also in-tree, but ports are not
regularly tested against it, right? 2.5 could get the same status.
Joachim
