On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Sturla Molden <[email protected]> wrote: > Brett Cannon <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Nope. A new minor release of Python is a massive undertaking which is why >> we have saved ourselves the hassle of doing a Python 2.8 or not giving a >> clear signal as to when Python 2.x will end as a language. > > Why not just define Python 2.8 as Python 2.7 except with a newer compiler? > I cannot see why that would be massive undertaking, if changing compiler > for 2.7 is neccesary anyway.
This would require recompiling all packages on OS X and Linux, even though nothing had changed. -- Nathaniel J. Smith Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh http://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
