I actually see more point in supporting 2.3 than 2.4 2.4 was a pretty worthless release :)
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM, James Mills <[email protected]>wrote: > I honestly don't see any point in supporting > python 2.3 at all, in fact I wouldn't even > support python 2.4 but that's just me. > > cheers > James > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Charlie Nolan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I think at this point, Pygame could drop official 2.3 support, but > > unofficially attempt to keep it working as long as practical. If > > Debian want to support new Pygame on their old version, they're > > welcome to report bugs for anything that gets broken by accident. > > > > That would avoid the unit testing headache without immediately > > breaking compatibility. > > > > -FM > > > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Lenard Lindstrom <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> This is not about removing Python 2.3 code. It is about new code, > >> particularly the unit test stuff. It is just tedious to keep checking if > >> some Python feature is 2.3 compatible when I no longer have 2.3 on my > >> machine. > >> > >> Lenard > >> > >> René Dudfield wrote: > >>> > >>> hi, > >>> > >>> the main reason for keeping 2.3 support was to support the last ye > >>> olde Debian stable I think... However they finally got their new > >>> release out with 2.5 as the standard python (unfortunately they > >>> released with a version of pygame from 2005). Plus the 2.3 python on > >>> tiger OSX, and not requiring msvc71 on windows too... like everyone > >>> has already mentioned. > >>> > >>> So hopefully we don't have to worry too much about 2.3 support. > >>> However unless there's a good reason, I don't think there's no need to > >>> rip out any 2.3 support code. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Lenard Lindstrom > >> <[email protected]> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > -- > -- "Problems are solved by method" >
