Aren't micro releases supposed to be backwards compatible? I'd expect an extension like PIL built against Python 2.3.0 to work with 2.3.5, as well. But perhaps the non-Python MacOS libraries have changed enough to make that fail.
Stuck on 2.3 for another 18 months, eh? Bill > > I've gotten some inquiries from users about my Python packages--PyQt in > > particular--and whether they will run on Tiger. Is it safe to say that > > Python stuff built/packaged against 2.3 on Panther will probably need to > > be repackaged for Tiger, assuming Tiger is using a more recent version > > of Python than 2.3.0? > > For what it's worth, I've heard that 2.3.5 is the version of Python included > with Tiger, but I haven't tried to confirm that since we'll all know the > answer the day after tomorrow... > > Dave _______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
