<html><body>On 11:22 am, anthony@interlink.com.au wrote:<br /><br />>> FWIW, I also agree with James that Python 3 shouldn't even be<br />>> released until the 2.x series has reached parity with its feature<br />>> set.  However, if there's continuity in the version numbers<br />>> instead of the release dates, I can at least explain to Twisted<br />>> users that we will _pretend_ they are released in the order of<br />>> their versions.<br />><br />>I'm not sure what "parity with it's feature set" means.<br /><br />I don't either!  "Parity with it is feature set"?  I can't even parse that!  ;-)<br /><br />By "parity with *its* feature set", though, I meant what you said here:<br /><br />>I do hope that it's _possible_ to work in a version of the language that works in both 2.6+ and 3.0+, even if under the hood there are differences.<br /><br />In order to do this, everything that has been changed in 3.0 has to have some mechanism for working both ways in some 2.x release.  I phrased this as its "feature set" because I am not aware of any new functionality in 3.0 that simply isn't available 2.x - everything I've seen are "cleanups", which expose basically the same features as 2.5.<br /><br />If there are some real new features, then I am in error.<br /></body></html>