> You may have more than one Python installation on a machine. This in no
> way forces you to move "all of your applications" to 2.1. The binary
> releases in particular make this drop-dead easy; they come with a bundled
> Python, and do not affect any other Python you may have in any way.

right, but by the same token the binary releases won't require special 
warnings to people about upgrading to 2.1.

> And
> note that Zope is a pretty diverse community - just because i18n
> is not very important to _you_ does not mean it is not important.
> There are plenty who consider it hugely significant, and who
> are at least as perturbed that we _haven't_ done this yet.

The question is not whether i18n ought to be done, but whether you ought to 
require upgrading to Py 2.1 to achieve it.

>> On the basis of prior performance I do not expect this objection to make
>> any difference in what DC does, but I needed to express it anyway.
> You may find that making your objections in a less inflammatory
> way will give them more impact.

I do not know how one would measure "impact" in order to test this 
proposition. If "impact" means changing DC policy or software in any way, 
then I suspect as previously stated that hearts+flowers wouldn't get it 
done either.  If "impact" means that the question would get a response, 
well, this thread's existence may be a counterexample.

What I do know is that requiring an upgrade to a not-yet-gold Py release as 
a prerequisite to the next Zope release is unwise software policy.

Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to