Python Version Strategy?

[Michael Hudson]

Trent Mick <trentm at ActiveState.com> writes:

> [Bo Vandenberg wrote]
> > I'm confused by what is going on with the python versions from various
> > sources.
> > 
> > Python.org has a final 2.2 (I use that) but Activestate has a python 2.1 as
> > its recommended python and only a 2.2 beta last I looked.
> 
> 2.2 is the latest stable Python release (modulo your own definition of
> stable). It was released 21 Dec 2001.
> 
> If your definition of stable is pretty high then you might want to consider
> using Python 2.1.2 (i.e. Python 2.1 with two addition bugfix releases).
> 
> ActivePython (from ActiveState) does not have a final 2.2 build just because
> we are behind (discliamer: I work at ActiveState). Expect an ActivePython 2.2
> very soon.

Are you going to wait for 2.2.1?  That shouldn't be all that far off.

> > Redhat, and most (all?) of the linux distros seem to be slow to fully
> > upgrade and I feel like this is raining in my cornflakes.
> 
> Yup. As I understand it the core Python folks don't really have any pull for
> what default Python version gets installed for the various Linux distros.
> 
> 
> > I'm not even beginning to think of when the next version of python (3?)
> > comes out.
> 
> The next version of Python will almost certainly be 2.3. The release schedule
> is here:

Well, the next version to be released will be 2.2.1, which is 2.2 +
bugfixes (there are quite a lot).

This will be released more-or-less when I get round to it, but "fairly
soon".  There will be at least one release candidate first.

Cheers,
M.

-- 
8. A programming language is low level when its programs require
   attention to the irrelevant.
  -- Alan Perlis, http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html