In article <j0cjaf$mum$1...@dough.gmane.org>, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > This introduced the problem that upgrading to Python 3 is no longer a > single thing. We really need 2to3.1 (the current 2to3), 2to3.2, 2to3.3, > etc, but someone would have to make the new versions, but no one, > currently, has the energy and interest to do that. So people who did not > port their 2.x code early now use the problem of multiple Python 3 > targets as another excuse not to do so now. (Actually, most 2.x code > should not be ported, but their are more libraries that we do need in 3.x.)
I don't quite understand this. Since 2to3 is included with Python 3, there are, in fact, separate releases of 2to3 for each release of Python 3 so far. And, unlike with Python 2 with a large installed base across a number of versions, Python 3 version support can be and is much more focused now in its early releases. Support for 3.0 was terminated immediately upon release of 3.1. And 3.1 is now in security-fix mode only. So, except for a brief overlap after the initial release of 3.2, there has only been one Python 3 release that needs to be targeted. Of course, that will change over time as adoption continues and mainstream OS's include specific Python 3 releases. But, for now, it's easy: just target the most recent Python 3 release, currently 3.2.1. Don't worry about earlier releases. -- Ned Deily, n...@acm.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
