Paul Moore added the comment:

I agree with Ned, this sounds like a significant change. In particular, 
Portable Python seems to currently only offer 3.2.5 at the moment. And it's not 
at all clear to me whether it's a 32-bit or a 64-bit version (but I suspect the 
former). One thing I'd want to understand would be why 3.4.3 and 64-bit 
versions weren't available. Is it just manpower (and if so, what manpower 
commitments would be needed from python-dev) or are there more fundamental 
issues with the Portable Python stack holding up the move to the latest version?

I'm also concerned that we should ensure that any distribution we bless is 
compatible with pip and packages installed on PyPI. I would be very concerned, 
for example, if we were moving towards a situation where wheels for Windows 
were *not* usable by the average user. (That specifically means that all 
commonly used distributions used the same CRT as the python.org builds, that 
distributions we recommend play well with pip, etc).

None of this is intended as a criticism of any of the distributions. I just 
think that actually *recommending* them in place of the python.org installers 
implies a certain level of assurance from python-dev - and we don't have any 
process in place to actually validate the distributions.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue22516>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to