> Since you don't care about any of the changes or features, and you > don't care if your users care, I'm not sure why you aren't just using > python 2.1. It's not like it's being erased via time machine. "Just > keep using the old thing" is a perfectly valid and extremely common > futureproofing scenario.
Well for one thing newer versions of python are faster and they come installed on other peoples linux and mac boxes. If I were only interested in the box sitting in front of me it sure would be a lot simpler. In reality even in a simple environment I have to support 2.3 running on a 32 bit platform and 2.4 running on a 64 bit platform with the same code. This is more of a pain than it should be. Don't get me wrong. I like things like generators that actually are useful (and amazingly fast also, I must say). I'd also love to be able to use stackless which would be even cooler but I can't because no-one else uses it to a first order approximation and I don't want to be responsible for installing it all over the place... I'm interested in developing software for/getting software from the python environment, ecosystem and community. In the short term I foresee everything bifurcating into two separate code bases, and I think that's a shame, and I don't really see the need. -- Aaron Watters === http://www.xfeedme.com/nucular/pydistro.py/go?FREETEXT=nightmare -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
