[Python-Dev] Re: Patch level versions and new features (Was: Some dull gc stats)

[Guido van Rossum]

> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >>>Perhaps we could have some kind of category for distutils
> >>>packages which marks them as system add-ons vs. site add-ons.
> >>
> >>+1 -- this should definitely be up to the package author/packager, not
> >>the local admin.  I once tried to convince Guido that the ability to
> >>occasionally upgrade standard library modules/packages would be a good
> >>thing, but he wasn't having it.  Any change of heart, O Mighty BDFL?
> > 
> > 
> > Before I answer that, here's a question.  Why do we think it's a good
> > idea to distribute upgrades as separate add-ons while we don't think
> > it's okay to distribute such upgrades with bugfix releases? 

[MAL]
> The idea is to provide bugfixes for Python versions which are
> no longer being maintained. Of course, the effect would only
> show a few years ahead.

Hm, if you really are fixing bugs in old versions, why not patch the
Python installation in-place rather than trying to play nice?

> > Doesn't
> > this just increase the variability of site configurations, and hence
> > version interaction hell?
> 
> I don't think that core packages are any different than
> other third party packages: they are usually independent
> enough from the rest of the code that upgrades don't affect
> the workings of the other code using it. The internals are
> free to change, though, e.g. to accomodate bug fixes, etc.

Well, I don't expect that we'll do independent upgrades for core
packages, so I propose to end this thread.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)