On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 13:27:20 +0100, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote:
On Dec 08, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
Well, if 3.2 remains in use for a longish time, then it is relevant, in
the
broader context, isn't it? We know how conservative Linux
distributions can
be with their Python releases - although most are still releasing 2.x as
their system Python, this could change at some point in the future.
Even if
it doesn't, there might be a fair user base of people stuck with 3.2
for any
number of reasons, and to support them, the change you propose won't
help,
because some variant of a package will still have to use u() and b(),
just
for 3.2 support.
Case in point: Ubuntu 12.04 is a long term support release, meaning 5
years of
official support on both the desktop and server. It will ship with
Python 2.7
and 3.2 only.
From a Plone perspective, Python 3 support is something that I don't see
becoming important for maybe 5 years, so support for 3.2 is simply not an
issue for us. Before Plone can consider a move to Python 3 we first need
support in the libraries we depend on. For those libraries under active
development it seems that compatibility with both 2.x and 3.x is the best
way to go. Adding support for u'' to Python 3.x certainly looks like it
would cut down the amount of work required for libraries like the Zope
Toolkit which already use unicode extensively.
Laurence
_______________________________________________
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
