[Python-Dev] [RELEASED] Python 2.7 alpha 2 (original) (raw)

Andrew Bennetts andrew at bemusement.org
Tue Jan 12 23:49:56 CET 2010

"Martin v. Löwis" wrote: [...]

> But a hypothetical 2.8 would also give people a way to move closer to > py3k without giving up on using all their 2.x-only dependencies.

How so? If they use anything that is new in 2.8, they will need to drop support for anything before it, no??? > I think it's much more likely that libraries like Twisted can support 2.8 > in the near future than 3.x. Most likely, Twisted "supports" 2.8 today (hopefully). But how does that help Twisted in moving to 3.2?

I'm not talking about Twisted moving to 3.x (FWIW, I think the only movement there so far is some patches for some -3 warnings). The situation I'm describing is a project X that:

(a) has 2.x-only dependencies, and (b) would like to be as close as possible to 3.x (because they like the new features and/or want to be as ready as possible to jump when (a) is fixed).

So just because project X depends on e.g. Twisted, and that Twisted in turn still supports 2.4, doesn't mean that X cannot move to 2.8, and doesn't mean it would get no benefit from doing so.

[...]

No, it won't. It might be if people move to 2.8 and drop 2.5, but they likely won't.

But this is my point. I think they would as an intermediate step to jumping to 3.x (which also requires dropping 2.5, after all!), if for some reason they cannot yet jump to 3.x, such as a 2.x-only dependency.

-Andrew.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list