"Brett C." <bac at OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message > But then the point of OS X 10.3 possibly becoming the largest install > base of Python of any version (it will be 2.3) came up. I an somehow amused at the prospect of Apple OX (Uni)X releases influencing the timing of Python releases. > With rough estimates being thrown around of 5 million installs > in about a year's > time, the point that making it difficult to run Python 2.3.x code on > that size of an install base would be bad. I've begun work on a 2.3 based project. If I were to get users who have received rather than installed Python, I would be more hesitant to simply say 'upgrade', especially for minor features in a 2.3.x. > that this is Mac it should not be expected that most users will want to, > let alone know how, to add a secondary install of Python since the > original is used by the OS and thus should not be overwritten). I presume a Mac installer would know how to add rather than overwrite. I am curious whether anyone has ever suggested to PC makers that Python + PyWin would be a useful addition to their Windows package -- both for setup/admin scripts (as done by RedHat. ..., and now Apple -- I don't know the specifics) and as a freebie addon (Basic for the 21st Century)? Terry J. Reedy
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