Brian Quinlan writes: > 1. 3rd party extension developers will have to switch very quickly to be > ready for the 2.3 release A very real issue, to be sure. > 2. Some 3rd party extension developers may have already released > binaries for Python 2.3, based on the understanding that there won't > be any additional API changes after the first beta (baring a > disaster). I'm not convinced that's a huge problem, though it could be an annoyance. > 3. I believe that the installer normally preserves site-packages when > doing an upgrade? If so, the user is going to be left with extension > modules that won't work. Yes, but site-packages is specific to the major.minor version of Python, so it would only bite people going from an alpha/beta to a final release, not from major.minor-1. Is this really an issue? -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> PythonLabs at Zope Corporation
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