On Feb 20, 9:04 pm, "Jeff Templon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > yo, > > Bjorn, I am not sure I see why my post is bull crap. I think all you > are doing is agreeing with me. My post was entitled "Python 3.0 unfit > for serious work", you just indicated that the Linux distros will > agree with me, in order to be taken seriously, the distros will have > to include 2.x python for a very long time. If 3.0 and 2.x have any > serious degree of incompatibility, python will be a favorite subject > for religious rants and heated arguments for many people. And if we > don't manage to restrain our d evelopers from using features that force > us prematurely to move to 3.0 ... and don't underestimate what this > means, because this means other things will have to move as well, > which may have dependencies on yet other things like C++ library > versions ... then I would have to, for reasons of maintainability, > argue against continuing to allow python code development in the > project. I love python, but not enough to make 20+ people's lives > difficult. > > There are already people making this sort of argument in our project. > > JT
I don't know the specifics of your app, but why does everyone insist that they need to use the 'system' python? At least one commercial python app I work with installs it's own completely independant version of python. For many apps where predictible behaviour is required you can install 'your' python, under /opt/myapp or /usr/local/myapp or whatever instead of python, python2.2, python3, etc. The downside is that you'll waste another 15Mb harddrive space, and you'll need to update your internal source tree 4 or 5 times when maintenance releases come out. Apologies if this sounds like a rant, I really mean it in a constructive way. -Grant -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list