On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 3 is not an option, and isn't going to be an option.
I know the Python 3000 project started with the attitude of not having any backwards compatibility to be able to start at a blank slate. But since then the compatibility set has increased so far that 3 now could be an option with very little effort. 3 *should* be an option, as well. Loads of software, in particular the whole Plone community, which is a significant part of the Python user base, will struggle very hard if 3 is not an option. But this discussion *has* been beaten to death. 3 should be an option, and it is an option, if u'' gets supported. -- Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting. http://www.colliberty.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
