[Python-Dev] Should we drop active support of OSF/1? (original) (raw)
Jesus Cea jcea at jcea.es
Mon May 3 06:57:44 CEST 2010
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Alias for distutils.file_util.write_file in e.g. shutils
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Should we drop active support of OSF/1?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 26/04/10 22:00, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
Maybe we can drop OSF/1 safely supporting Tru64 yet, but we don't have any buildbot running any of this systems... Dropping support is fine with me, in the long term. If PEP 11 is truly followed, we should deprecate support in one version, and drop it in the next one. This would mean we add a easy-to-remove configure error in 3.2, and remove the support in 3.3.
Would be enough to raise an "ERROR" at configure time if OSF test is positive?. To delete that intentional "ERROR" would be trivial.
In 3.3 I would remove the configure tests and the "#if" conditional compilation related to them.
Jesus Cea Avion // /// /// jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/ // // // // // jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org // // ///// . // // // // // "Things are not so easy" // // // // // // "My name is Dump, Core Dump" /// //_/ // // "El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQCVAwUBS95XyJlgi5GaxT1NAQLQLQP/cE2E27g8hSAbH7XzewDDYzx1AZ11ja55 xuR0PLTg/yQgE+4oifMa56Rs54YVRtRkh+i7B5yR5+lcI2DJgfqiu2Q9Of8KbwHp SQ2BVlshUmjhImWh486Qj6aQ9sF3xMdaxOGVLG+SJOBAEVw4UWEkZYPpQOuKRTfG K0SYYLhERoY= =CUNo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Alias for distutils.file_util.write_file in e.g. shutils
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Should we drop active support of OSF/1?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]