Making code 2.1 compatible

[Donn Cave]

Quoth Tim Peters <tim.one at comcast.net>:
| [Donn Cave, on the Python Business Forum]
|> Interesting, but only in the sense of "tantalizing".  It reads
|> like the author (Michael Hudson?) already knew about the basic
|> idea, and assumed the reader does too.
|
| Laura Creighton wrote the FAQ:
|
|     http://pbf.nuxeo.org/faq.html

Thanks.  That does get fairly specific, 18 month release cycle
and limited new features.  I infer from the language that they
understand that the new features part has potential problems.

|> And the choice of 2.2 doesn't help clarify it, since it's a pretty new
|> release.
|
| What's to clarify?  The 2.2 line is the most stable Python there is.
| They're business people, not Luddites <wink>.

Matter of perspective.  I would probably have picked 2.2 if it
had been left to me, just because it's current.  But when I've
proposed it in the past I've suggested the recently out-of-current
release, because that makes it immediately an issue.  Either way,
not on the basis of any technical properties of the releases in
question.  I don't even know what "stable" means, rather ambiguous
if you ask me.

| Indeed.  The PBF is a wonderful thing, and wouldn't exist without Laura's
| vision and energy.

Good deal.

	Donn Cave, donn at u.washington.edu