On Apr 28, 2005, at 5:59, Dethe Elza wrote:
I'm using 2.4.1 and will be generally be running the latest stable release. Using py2app makes it so convenient to just include the Python I'm working with, and it's now easy to install the latest Python, there's less and less reason to fiddle around with older versions.It depends on what you distribute. If it's double-clickable applications, I agree. But I distribute libraries and command-line tools for /usr/local/bin. Unless I have overlooked something, py2app can't do those, and I imagine it would be difficult to build command-line tools that would find a Python version inside an application bundle at an unknown location. So if I go for 2.4, I have to tell all my users to install 2.4 first. That by itself wouldn't perhaps be a big issue (one package more to install), but there is also the problem that if some libraries are provided for 2.3 and others for 2.4, much of the attraction of Python for occasional programmers would be gone.
In short, I expect to have to offer packages for both 2.3 and 2.4 and explain the difference to people who don't really care. I'd be happier if the Mac world could agree on a single Python version.
Konrad. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Konrad Hinsen Laboratoire Léon Brillouin, CEA Saclay, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France Tel.: +33-1 69 08 79 25 Fax: +33-1 69 08 82 61 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
