> A more critical issue might be why people haven't adopted 2.0 yet; > there seems little reason is there to continue using 1.5.2, yet I > still see questions on the XML-SIG, for example, from people who > haven't upgraded. Is it that Zope doesn't support it? Or that Red > Hat and Debian don't include it? Availability of Linux binaries is certainly an issue. On xml-sig, one Linux distributor (I forgot whether SuSE or Redhat) mentioned that they won't include 2.0 in their current major release series (7.x for both). Furthermore, the available 2.0 binaries won't work for either Redhat 7.0 nor SuSE 7.0; I think collecting binaries as we did for earlier releases is an important activity that was forgotten during 2.0. In addition, many packages are still not available for 2.0. Zope is only one of them; gtk, Qt, etc packages are still struggling with Unicode support. omniORBpy has #include <python15/Python.h> in their sources, ILU does not compile on 2.0 (due to wrong tests involving the PY_MAJOR/MINOR roll-over), Fnorb falls into the select.bind parameter change pitfall. This list probably could be continued - I'm sure many of the maintainers of these packages would appreciate a helping hand from some Python Guru. Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4