[Barry Warsaw, 2010-04-22]
> On Apr 21, 2010, at 12:01 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> >2to3 is not reliable, at least not for now.
>
> I agree that there's no way we can just enable it by default. Too many
> upstream packages need modifications to work in Python 3. However, for those
> that are Py
"Barry Warsaw" wrote:
>On Apr 20, 2010, at 04:57 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>>I think it is difficult to know for sure what the future will hold. If the
>>backport is not technically complex, I think a backport with the default to
>>off would be a nice tool in the box is things go differentl
On Apr 21, 2010, at 12:03 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>[Barry Warsaw, 2010-04-20]
>> If 10.10 includes
>> only Python 2.7, then sure, we'll only back port to that version.
>
>why do you want to backport it to 2.X for a single python2.x package?
It would only make sense if we wanted to share source
On Apr 22, 2010, at 01:47 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>Based on my experience with the Python 2.5 and 2.6 transitions, I'd really
>prefer to have Ubuntu follow Debian rather than lead.
Ideally, yes I'd like the same thing, but I'll need help because I'm so new to
Debian.
So if it makes sense for
On Apr 21, 2010, at 12:01 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>2to3 is not reliable, at least not for now.
I agree that there's no way we can just enable it by default. Too many
upstream packages need modifications to work in Python 3. However, for those
that are Python 3-ready, it's a useful tool. The
On Apr 20, 2010, at 04:57 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>I think it is difficult to know for sure what the future will hold. If the
>backport is not technically complex, I think a backport with the default to
>off would be a nice tool in the box is things go differently than we plan.
>Other than the
6 matches
Mail list logo
