On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 01:07, Andrew Bennetts <andrew at bemusement.org> wrote: > But a hypothetical 2.8 would also give people a way to move closer to > py3k without giving up on using all their 2.x-only dependencies. I > think it's much more likely that libraries like Twisted can support 2.8 > in the near future than 3.x. When 2.7 was discussed several people agreed that 2.7 should include as much 3.x stuff as possible to ease transition. That turned out to not be very much, so I'm not sure there is more. :) Unless of course, 2.8 starts including more of the refactored libraries, but that's a very minor issue in porting, so it won't help much. To really help, it needs to start implement things that break backwards compatibility. That would be weird. :) -- Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
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