At 12:51 AM 11/4/2009 -0500, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
With the 2.x series, users and operating systems seem to move on fairly rapidly, because dependencies generally continue to work if you upgrade just one version. This isn't quite as formal a requirement as I would like (warnings get generated, unit tests fail, things do break) but in practice, users can rely on it for most functionality. If 3.x could be broken into a series of transitions like that, where you can upgrade one version, fix some stuff, then upgrade another version, even if you couldn't actually support more than 2 versions at once, I think that we could pick up the migration pace to the point where we might actually be using 3.x syntax in a few years. Having a 2.x series which goes to 2.9 and then stops isn't *quite* the same thing as having one that moves over continuously to some 3.x version, but it does seem to me that by that point the chasm between versions will have narrowed to a crack, and the migration will be a little hop over it rather than the currently-required great flying leap.
+1 (I actually thought this was the original plan.) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
