Do you QA your Python? Was: 2.1 vs. 2.2

[phil hunt]

On 14 Apr 2002 06:58:17 GMT, Bengt Richter <bokr at oz.net> wrote:
>>
>>In that particular debate, a lot of people were asking for certain new
>>features to be LEFT OUT of Python.  I don't understand how someone can
>>volunteer to contribute work, time, or money toward leaving something out.
>
>Maintaining older baseline releases, where the features are already left out?

The problem here is that then there multiple "current" versions of 
Python.

IMO there is no need for multiple versions. Just 2 would do for me, 
a stable branch and an unstable branch, like Linux uses.

Alkso, I have no problem with changes that DO NOT BREAK EXISTING 
CODE.

>I don't think that work is zero, so should the BPWIs[1] be doing that, and who should say?
>
>The trick is what happens when various versions are adopted out in the real world
>without asking those whose scripts are expected to continue to run.
>Can one distribute a script with first line #!/usr/bin/python21 and expect the
>link to be there wherever python21 (or fully compatible other version) is available?
>
>Otherwise new versions will potentially make extra work for me, which I'd rather
>volunteer in other ways ;-)
>
>Apparently 1.5.2 and 2.1.x and 2.2.x are semi-official baseline versions. Is it/could it
>be official policy that #!/usr/bin/python(15|21|22) links should exist if a site
>has the identified version? 

IMO this is a good idea.


-- 
<"><"><"> Philip Hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> <"><"><">
"I would guess that he really believes whatever is politically 
advantageous for him to believe." 
                        -- Alison Brooks, referring to Michael
                              Portillo, on soc.history.what-if