Gratitude due to Red Hat? More work for the PBF?

Grant Edwards grante at visi.com
Wed Aug 21 06:13:28 CEST 2002


In article <1029901789.875625 at yasure>, Donn Cave wrote:

>|> I'm a little hesitant to say this, but today (while, of all
>|> things, putting a sales proposal together) I realised that my
>|> attitude to the "Red Hat comes with 1.5.2" question has now
>|> altered. When considering a hosting environment I am happy to
>|> *exclude* any company who can only offer 1.5.2,
>|
>| I'm not sure what this has to do with RH.  RedHat has offered
>| Python 2.1 for quite a while now.  It's not what you get if you
>| just run the command "python", but it's available as "python2".
> 
> Right - Redhat made their mistake not when they started shipping
> Python, but when they started using it themselves without taking
> language change into account.

What RH should have done (and it wouldn't have been much work) is to allow
the user to install a recent python version (2.1 or 2.2) as "python" and
have 1.52 installed as "python152".  The RH admin scripts that depend on
1.52 could then explicitly invoke python152 and it wouldn't matter which
version the user wanted as "python"

I remember when rpm was written in Python...

-- 
Grant Edwards
grante at visi.com



More information about the Python-list mailing list