do you think it's feasible to have a single codebase for the two versions?

at first i thought the changes would be minimal -- but they turned out to be
quite numerous.
and it's not only syntax -- brine and vinegar had to be partially rewritten,
as well as lots of small changes,
like items() instead of iteritems() and byte strings instead of strings.

i think maintaining the two versions in the same codebase would be a
nightmare...
everything would be so cumbersome and tedious.

another idea i had was to have a xxx3.py version of every xxx.py module, so
they all live side by side,
but i don't think it makes much sense.

==========

on a side note, what is the minimum version of python do you people think
RPyC should support?
i think 2.5 is early enough (been released in 2006)... should we retain 2.4
compatibility?


-tomer

An NCO and a Gentleman


2011/3/8 Alex Grönholm <[email protected]>

> I see that you've put some py3k only code in the master3 branch. What's
> your plan? Are you abandoning the idea of compatibility code and a shared
> codebase?
>

Reply via email to