On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 07:22:36AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > Anthony Towns writes: > > python1.5's still useful to users, isn't it, especially ones with > > important python programs > that was the precondition for the removal. Currently there are xtalk > and python-pam. I do not count pydb, because a debugger for the old > version alone doesn't make sense.
I mean for people who haven't managed to port their *own* (unpackaged) apps to python 2.x. Considering this list just went through convincing me that this *wasn't* a trivial matter, I hope you're not going to go changing your minds on me now. Also, if python1.5's dropped from woody+1, then people who want it are at least able to get it from woody; if it's dropped from woody they can't get it from potato. > > they don't want to port to 2.1 just yet? > where "yet" is greater than about a year ..., and compared to python2 > much longer. We didn't port to 2.1 until just now. Don't see why we should expect everyone else to have done so already. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. "Security here. Yes, maam. Yes. Groucho glasses. Yes, we're on it. C'mon, guys. Somebody gave an aardvark a nose-cut: somebody who can't deal with deconstructionist humor. Code Blue." -- Mike Hoye, see http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/armadillos.txt
pgpVw7bLW6o8D.pgp
Description: PGP signature
