On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 23:11, Vincent Bernat <ber...@debian.org> wrote: > I also tend to believe that there are a lot of packages that will just > fail to run with Python 2.6 but will have no problem to build, because > for most packages, building just means to copy files in the right > location. The later we switch to Python 2.6, the more difficult it will > be to catch those bugs.
I absolutely agree with this (even though, for those packages that byte-compile the files they install, it's a smaller problem) and I fear there are several situations where there are hidden bugs only discovered with (long) *usage* of a system with 2.6 as default: waiting to do the switch, doesn't help to release a better squeeze, only a worst and buggier one. Additionally, as a side note, unstable is "unstable" by definition: its users knows it, and if something breaks in it, it will either be fixed or not in stable, so "break users apps" problem is less appealing (even though it exists). Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8b2d7b4d1002281450h79524b79j3e99c410dcec...@mail.gmail.com
