Benjamin Peterson wrote: > 2010/2/12 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com>: >> Brett Cannon wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: >>> I vote on giving up the 2to3 sandbox. >> One other point - is there a Python 2.6 backwards compatibility >> restriction on 2to3 at the moment? If there isn't, should there be? > > I try to keep it compatible with 2.6, since we have to backport changes.
With 2.7 just around the corner, it should probably be listed in PEP 291 on that basis. Of course, PEP 291 could do with a list of 2.5 and 2.6 specific features first... Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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
