[Python-Dev] [RELEASED] Python 2.7 alpha 2

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.


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list