[Dev] Python Version?
Mike C. Fletcher
mcfletch at rogers.com
Thu Nov 7 20:09:09 PST 2002
I would tend to agree that 2.2.2 is likely to be the most appropriate
platform on which to build. 2.3 adds speed enhancements, apparently, and
there's no reason a third-party couldn't release a binary/distribution
based on it, but it doesn't seem to have many feature enhancements that
would dictate using it as our base. If we're targetting a December
alpha for Chandler I'd rather be working with a released (and already 2
bug-fix-iterations old) Python version (2.2.2), rather than one that's
still in alpha.
Michael R. Bernstein wrote:
>On Thu, 2002-11-07 at 16:53, John Anderson wrote:
>>On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 07:42 PM, Michael R. Bernstein wrote:
>>>From: "Michael R. Bernstein" <webmaven at lvcm.com>
>>>Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 7:42:15 PM US/Pacific
>>>To: OSAF Development <dev at osafoundation.org>
>>>Subject: [Dev] Python Version?
>>>Does anyone have thoughts as to which version of Python Chandler should
>>>be based on / distributed with?
>>My inclination is to always use the most recent version that is stable.
>>ZODB, for example doesn't work unless you use Python 2.2.2.
>Well, yes, I agree, especially for self contained applications.
>But if Chandler is going to be useful as a stable development platform
>(for third party developers to add their own Packages to), than the OSAF
>is likely going to have to make a longer term commitment to a particular
>version of Python, at least between major version numbers.
>'Python in a Tie' (2.2.x?) is supposedly intended to be just such a
>long-term commitment (18 months or so) release, and it's likely that
>Zope Corp. and PythonLabs will base their application and toolkit
>releases (Zope and ZODB, respectively) on it.
Mike C. Fletcher
Designer, VR Plumber, Coder
More information about the Dev