3 and 2.6 are compatible. so develop on 3, to make sure you don't use old junk, and then switch to 2.6 if you need to. there are a few wrinkles in doing so, but it is not a big problem.
3.0 is a nicer language. it's cleaner and more consistent. i think important libraries will move there. no-one wants to do a perl. it's the likely future and you can always jump back to 2.6 if needed. and in the long term, we will all die. andrew Stefan Spoettl wrote: > In the pass it was always a good idea to use the newest Python verison for > starting the development of a new application. First one could benefit > from the additional features and second one could be sure that the > community would have been passing during development. > > Nowadays we have at least three Python versions (2.5, 2.6, 3.0) on our > machines and - damned! - I really don't know which version I should use > for my next development. The Unix-like systems as much as the major part > of well maintained third party libraries are remaining "penetrantly" on > 2.5. Why the vangard of the community don't like to use at least 2.6 for > bridging to the future Python? Is this the mutiny against the empery of > the BDFL or is the vangard just asking for some more time? If I want to > attest my personal attachment to the king by using 3.0, what will happen? > Will I be deserted someday? > > Stefan-- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
