From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Third try at documenting command integration requirements. Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 17:58:18 -0800 Message-ID: <7vobiijxol.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20121126053557.E56434065F@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vzk24qgjx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20121126214134.GA1713@thyrsus.com> <50B4A8E1.7050801@alum.mit.edu> <20121127175618.GA11845@thyrsus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Michael Haggerty , git@vger.kernel.org To: esr@thyrsus.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 28 02:58:37 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TdWv5-0002DF-VN for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 02:58:36 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750943Ab2K1B6V (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:58:21 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:34882 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750776Ab2K1B6U (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:58:20 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F29A5E1; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:58:20 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=/A1ZASAu5B0QApBDPxV68W7Mfjw=; b=I0NElI Lmll3BY5T+7YU42HVWtj15SmvhJluX1MpK1kxzJtzSqkoKWYRT+LrqiUWnIDb0Xa GyFw96xzFL/fTO0vFACYkSoUBVxUGcRBosK4V2SsWBrB8FfeQ6dis2/yYcBCxWip uJ82JahIlhjnA5dL+YCvv3vOgn/SoT+788Tj4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=itoKEZioO5sRBWO1/yvtQWvYMLGVXPsV 2XZaOC6sS674mLqwNGNjFV8gmzeakuswJRX0n2zLj+SrMQ5Qn+Tq3/TujUhHJDk+ z/qjvIu16nrxOtefaqnuE/ZkoXOxOxDYHhFIRKaIro2CEjOfalIOEPeVHsFjQMDr 60g6/kMmQoM= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B28A5E0; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:58:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 96314A5DF; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:58:19 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20121127175618.GA11845@thyrsus.com> (Eric S. Raymond's message of "Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:56:19 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 1517B26E-38FF-11E2-9B7B-C2612E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Eric S. Raymond" writes: > I agree that 2.4 is still quite OK. I'm a little concerned that dropping that > far back might store up some transition problems for the day we decide to > make the jump to Python 3. > > On the other hand, I think gating features on RHEL5 might be > excessively cautious. According to [1], RHEL will red-zone within 30 > days if it hasn't done so already ([1] says "Q4"). And RHEL6 (with > Python 2.6) has been shipping for two years. I won't worry about Python 3 yet; in what timeframe did Python's i18n/unicode support become usable? In 2.4, or 2.6?