I was pestering Bjorn about making python be dynamically loaded, but I
went ahead a compiled from source. Easy as pie, plus now I have python
2.5 support :)

Thanks for making it that easy, although I still believe that people
that actually use python are way past 2.3 by now.

Still it's easier to have them compile it themselves, than to ask them
to move up a version of their OS, so I see why we're having this
issue.

It should be made easier to pick python version depending on the build
platform, hope we can figure this out.

On Nov 4, 12:17 pm, Ben Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nico Weber wrote:
> >>> It seems this is the only way to go then.  But...I wonder if it  
> >>> really
> >>> is worth my time making two distributions just so a few users get to
> >>> use Python 2.5 instead of 2.3.  I think I need a better reason than
> >>> that for something as drastic as distributing two different versions
> >>> of the binary.  Maybe I underestimate the number of users who would
> >>> benefit from 2.5, but for now I'll just keep building with 2.3.  :-/
>
> > That sounds reasonable.
>
> +1.
>
> Real Python-heads can always compile themselves.
>
> >> What about feature freezing the current 10.4 version and continuing
> >> development for 10.5 only?  Then you could enable garbage collection
> >> which would be much more convenient for development -- this issue bugs
> >> me especially because if someone wants to make a plugin, I'm pretty
> >> sure they can't use garbage collection since MacVim doesn't.
>
> > I don't use Tiger, but I don't think dropping Tiger already is a good  
> > idea (see e.g.http://update.omnigroup.com/).
>
> I agree, but I do use Tiger. 10.4.9. :-)
>
> Ben.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_mac" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to