I'm flexible: I'll use what py2app requires. I hope most other developers are in the same situation.
Python 2.6 sounds like an excellent choice to me. There are binary installers for most common 3rd party packages, so it's easy to adopt (unlike Python 2.7). -- Russell In article <4deadfb9-6aab-43bc-9d18-2568f864b...@mac.com>, Ronald Oussoren <ronaldousso...@mac.com> wrote: > Hi, > > What is the minimal python version that peoply actually use py2app with? > > I want to do some development on py2app and related package later this year > to make it fully support python eggs and may want to modernize the code while > doing that. The amount of modernization that is possible depends in part on > the minimaly required python version. > > That said, if I start doing serious development it is pretty likely that I > accidently break support for versions before 2.6, as that is the minimal > version I test PyObjC with. Python 2.6 would also allow me to rip out all > compatibility cruft, including the cruft needed to annotate byte literals > without using the byte-literal syntax. > > Ronald > > P.S. I'm typing this at the airport on the way back from europython. AFAIK > py2app on my machine currently works with both python2.7 and python3.2, I'll > therefore push out releases after committing some small fixes (which will > happen once I have Internet > access)--------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
