PyWin32 for Python 3.x

Tim Golden mail at
Sun Mar 15 19:44:37 CET 2009

John Nagle wrote:
>    That "wizard" won't even install unless Python 3.0 is "in the
> registry", which apparently means "installed as the default Python".

No, it just means "installed somewhere". I have 6 different
versions of Python installed on this box. The choice of
which is "the default" is mine, either by selection at
installation or by later manipulation of associations,
path etc.

> After giving the user an alert box, it dumps you into a dialog which
> says "Python 3.0 is required for this package.  Select installation to 
> use".
> That's blank, and the form fields "Python Directory" and "Installation
> Directory" won't accept input, so it can't even be overridden manually.

I agree that this is annoying.

>    Lame.
>    And no, I don't want to build it from source.  I'm just checking to
> see how close Python 3.x is getting to prime time.  Looks like it's
> still a long way off.

While I don't feel strongly about the matter -- I have no particular
need to use Python 3.x for now, altho' I'm tracking it -- I think
that you're making quite a far-reaching statement on scant evidence. Fair
enough, you couldn't do a quick-and-dirty install of pywin32-213
for Python 3.x without having Python 3.x installed and in the
registry. To go from that to claiming that Python 3.x is a long
way from prime time seems at the very least to ignore the legions
of non-Windows users who neither know nor care about pywin32.


More information about the Python-list mailing list