From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Joachim Schmitz" Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:30:30 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 20 22:31:21 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 1Tlni3-00039K-TG for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:20 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751592Ab2LTVbA (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:31:00 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:40123 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750983Ab2LTVbA (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:31:00 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tlnhu-0002zk-Um for git@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:10 +0100 Received: from dsdf-4db53d15.pool.mediaways.net ([77.181.61.21]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:10 +0100 Received: from jojo by dsdf-4db53d15.pool.mediaways.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:10 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dsdf-4db53d15.pool.mediaways.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes: > >> That was the first of three patches I have promised. In order to do >> the next one, which will be a development guidelines recommend >> compatibility back to some specific version X, I need a policy >> decision. How do we set X? >> >> I don't think X can be < 2.4, nor does it need to be - 2.4 came out >> in 2004 and eight years is plenty of deployment time. >> >> The later we set it, the more convenient for developers. But of >> course by setting it late we trade away some portability to >> older systems. >> >> In previous discussion of this issue I recommended X = 2.6. >> That is still my recommendation. Thoughts, comments, objections? > > 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. Bye, Jojo