RE: Python version auditing followup

["Joachim Schmitz" <jojo@schmitz-digital.de>]

> From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@pobox.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:39 PM
> To: Joachim Schmitz
> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup
> 
> "Joachim Schmitz" <jojo@schmitz-digital.de> writes:
> 
> > Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> I personally would think 2.6 is recent enough.  Which platforms that
> >> are long-term-maintained by their vendors still pin their Python at
> >> 2.4.X?  2.4.6 was in 2008 that was source only, 2.4.4 was in late
> >> 2006 that was the last 2.4 with binary release.
> >>
> >> Objections?  Comments?
> >
> > We have a working 2.4.2 for HP-NonStop and some major problems getting
> > 2.7.3 to work.
> 
> I do not think a platform that stops at 2.4.2 instead of going to
> higher 2.4.X series deserves to be called "long term maintained by
> their vendors".  It sounds more like "attempted to supply 2.4.X and
> abandoned the users once one port was done" to me.

Well, not entirely wrong, but not all true at too.
I guess I need to defend the vendor here: It is not really the Vendor (HP) that provided Python 2.4.2 or tries to provide 2.7.3, it
is a volunteer and community effort. HP did sponsor the 2.4.2 port though (by allowing an HP employee to do the port inn his regular
working hours). It is not doing this any longer (since 2007). Since then it is a small group doing this on a purely voluntary basis
in their spare time (one HP employee amongst them, me).
Same goes for the git port BTW. And for every other port provided on http://ituglib.connect-cummunity.org (this machine is sponsored
by HP).
Almost every other port, as some pretty recently made it into the officially supported O/S version, so far: Samba, bash, coreutils,
vim, gzip, bzip2, Perl, PHP.

Bye, Jojo