How important is Python 1.5 compatibility?

[Aahz]

In article <40E092A9.43C2CDDF at alcyone.com>,
Erik Max Francis  <max at alcyone.com> wrote:
>
>How important do people think Python 1.5 compatibility is?  For some of
>my projects I've strived to keep it compatible with 1.5 (at least for
>the portions of the applications that actually would work with 1.5; for
>instance Unicode support obviously requires Python 2.x).  It seemed to
>me that this used to be fairly important, when, say, 2.1 was new, mostly
>because of other large Python applications that required 1.5, or lazy
>ISPs who still used older version.
>
>Based on the discussions I've seen, I'm getting the impression that this
>is less and less the case as time goes on (which is, of course, exactly
>how you'd expect things to be).  How important is Python 1.5
>compatibility today?

As of yesterday, we (at my new job) just dropped the need for 1.5.2
because we dumped the old server.  It's not clear whether our target
will be 2.2, 2.3, or 2.4 for the future; I'm going to argue for 2.3
if there's any intent to use new-style classes.  (The new server is
running RH9 with Python 2.2 as the default.)
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"Typing is cheap.  Thinking is expensive."  --Roy Smith, c.l.py