Hi, I'm planning to drop support for CPython 2.3 right in the next release. If anyone feels an urgent need for it to stay supported, please provide a solid line of reasoning in response to this e-mail, preferably accompanied by a funding plan. Basically, CPython 2.3 lacks several features at the language, standard library and C level that make a developer's and distributor's life easier. It was followed by Python 2.4 seven years ago and has not received even security updates for more than three years. There have been seven newer release series of CPython since then, so it's not just resting, it's a truly dead parrot. Stefan
I'm planning to drop support for CPython 2.3 right in the next release.
There have been seven newer release series of CPython since then, so it's not just resting, it's a truly dead parrot.
+1
just keeping the this-version-binaries & archives available shall be good enough. As "who is using a >7 year old Python release, might as well be using a > 1 year old lxml release" Harald -- GHUM GmbH Harald Armin Massa Spielberger Straße 49 70435 Stuttgart 0173/9409607 Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 734971 - persuadere. et programmare
Op Vr, 2011-08-26 om 09:20 +0200 skryf Stefan Behnel:
Hi,
I'm planning to drop support for CPython 2.3 right in the next release. If anyone feels an urgent need for it to stay supported, please provide a solid line of reasoning in response to this e-mail, preferably accompanied by a funding plan.
Basically, CPython 2.3 lacks several features at the language, standard library and C level that make a developer's and distributor's life easier. It was followed by Python 2.4 seven years ago and has not received even security updates for more than three years. There have been seven newer release series of CPython since then, so it's not just resting, it's a truly dead parrot.
We still try to support Python 2.4 in our code (translate.sourceforge.net). Supported versions of RHEL still have Python 2.3 and 2.4, so if we want lxml to run on currently supported versions of such enterprise distributions, that might be interesting to consider. RHEL 4 is still in regular life cycle, with extended life cycle going until 2015! Whether that is relevant is another question. I guess if it is clearly indicated which version still works with Python 2.3 there is a solution if there is somebody who really needs that. Tracking the number of downloads for that release after becoming incompatible with 2.3 (relative to releases after that) might provide some information to show if there is any demand, although noise might make things hard. Our project won't be affected if lxml requires Python 2.4 or later. Keep well Friedel -- Recently on my blog: http://translate.org.za/blogs/friedel/en/content/virtaal-070-released
F Wolff, 26.08.2011 12:59:
Op Vr, 2011-08-26 om 09:20 +0200 skryf Stefan Behnel:
I'm planning to drop support for CPython 2.3 right in the next release. If anyone feels an urgent need for it to stay supported, please provide a solid line of reasoning in response to this e-mail, preferably accompanied by a funding plan.
Basically, CPython 2.3 lacks several features at the language, standard library and C level that make a developer's and distributor's life easier. It was followed by Python 2.4 seven years ago and has not received even security updates for more than three years. There have been seven newer release series of CPython since then, so it's not just resting, it's a truly dead parrot.
We still try to support Python 2.4 in our code (translate.sourceforge.net). Supported versions of RHEL still have Python 2.3 and 2.4, so if we want lxml to run on currently supported versions of such enterprise distributions, that might be interesting to consider. RHEL 4 is still in regular life cycle, with extended life cycle going until 2015! Whether that is relevant is another question.
Yes, I know that Py2.4 is still used in many older Solaris installations and RHEL servers, that's why I'm fine with continuing to support it (although maybe not until 2015...). It's a different situation for Py2.3, though, which doesn't even build on many of the current 64bit platforms any more.
I guess if it is clearly indicated which version still works with Python 2.3 there is a solution if there is somebody who really needs that.
The supported CPython versions have been stated explicitly on all of lxml's PyPI pages for several years now. Currently, the 2.2.8 and 2.3 releases are visible, and that can continue to be the case for a while.
Tracking the number of downloads for that release after becoming incompatible with 2.3 (relative to releases after that) might provide some information to show if there is any demand, although noise might make things hard.
There's usually a lot of noise from people downloading older versions by (I guess) following old links or using preconfigured buildout scripts, or from automated download sites that crawl PyPI. But in general, the downloads of older versions tend to slow down considerably after a while.
Our project won't be affected if lxml requires Python 2.4 or later.
That's to be expected for most users. Stefan
participants (3)
-
F Wolff -
Massa, Harald Armin -
Stefan Behnel