On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 12:11:41 +0200 Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirk...@ochtman.nl> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > A year is no age for a Python installation. A customer of mine has one > > > website developed in 2003, still running on the same server. It runs > > Python > > > 2.3, I don't remember which version, but I'd be surprised if it is 2.3.7 > > > from 2008. > > > > Right. If they don't keep their Python up-to-date, why would they > > bother with their tzupdate? > > I'm sorry, is there a new releases of Python 2.3 made last year I don't > know about?
Python 2.3 has been EOL'ed for years. It definitely is not up-to-date, for any reasonable definition of the term. For example, it will have many unplugged security holes. So will that user's version of OpenSSL and other libraries. If they don't want to apply security fixes, why should we even care about their timezones' freshness? Regards Antoine. -- Software development and contracting: http://pro.pitrou.net _______________________________________________ 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
