<html><body>On 11 Jan, 08:22 pm, sluggoster@gmail.com wrote:<br />>On 1/11/07, James Y Knight <foom@fuhm.net> wrote:<br />>> If the goal is really to have Py 3.0 be released later this year,<br /><br />>There will certainly be demand for an asynchronous server in 3.0,<br /><br />To flip the question around: there might be a demand for Twisted in 3.0, but will there be a demand for 3.0 in Twisted?  It might just be easier for everyone concerned to just continue maintaining 2.x forever.  I have yet to see a reason why, other than continued maintenance, 3.0 would be a preferable development platform.<br /><br />>So the two projects will operate independently, and the 3.0 one may be<br />>smaller and less ambitious than Twisted.  But if the need is there it<br />>will be written.<br /><br />It is quite likely that someone else will write some completely different code for python 3.0 that calls select().  I hadn't considered that the goal of 3.0 was to *discover* these people by alienating existing Python developers - that's crafty!  If so, though, you'll have to figure out a way to stop Anthony from providing all this compatibility stuff.  He might make it too attractive for us to continue development on future versions :).<br /><br />>How did Perl 4 and Perl 5 handle the situation?  I basically waited<br />>2-3 years after Perl 5 came out, then started programming the new way.<br />> If it mattered (it didn't), I would have tied my applications<br />>specifically to Perl 4.<br /><br />I handled the Perl 4 to 5 transition by dropping Perl and moving to Python, because if I was going to port all my code to another language I wanted to at least port to a better language.<br /></body></html>