Python 2.4 killing commercial Windows Python development ?

[Michael Kearns]

A.B., Khalid wrote:

> Kindly note that the Python source distribution does include project
> files for building Python 2.4 with MSVC6. Add to that the fact that
> with pyMinGW[1] one can build yet another Windows distribution not
> dependent on mscvr71.dll and some of the logic about not upgrading to
> Python 2.4, IMHO, just goes away.
> 
> An official release of installers for either or both versions would I
> think complicate matters: more choices translate to more confusion.
> Needless to say that extension authors (for Python 2.4) would then need
> to make two binaries for every extension they release for Python 2.4:
> one for the mscvr71.dll dependent Python distribution, and another one
> for the mscvrt.dll dependent version(s). This I think would hurt Python
> and its users.
> 
> The solution is to have those that know enough to really need to build
> Python on their own according to their requirments. They would then
> have to deal with compiling the Python 2.4 extensions themselves, of
> course. But this would make things simple and hopefully address the
> needs of everyone.

This is all very true, and a fair point of what is achievable. It just 
seems unfortunate that a developer is required to get involved in C 
compilation and looking after all module dependencies, purely to use 
Python in a commercial environment.

I write Java as my main language. It's what I'm paid to do, and I've 
spent the best part of the last 8 years doing so.

Over the last couple of years, I've been toying with Python, and trying 
to find ways to integrate it with my daily routine - I now have a 
complete internal build system written with it, along with several 
utility scripts.

I don't code C. I could probably blag it at a very slow pace, but I'm 
not going to be given time to play with it. We have some C developers, 
but again, no resource allocation will ever be made to compile a 
language that isn't used for the mainstream software we produce.

All I'm trying to do is use python wherever I can without having to 
persuade those in power that it would be a valuable asset (as this would 
probably be a waste of breath in many circumstances), and yet I can't 
(from 2.4 at least) because it requires more time and cost to be allocated.

I would guess from the responses so far that Python 2.4 just isn't used 
within commercially shipping products, or is quietly used by an product 
so as not to incur any legal wrath that might be found. Perhaps it isn't 
quite ready for what I want to achieve. I don't know.

I just know that I am spending the rest of the day migrating back to 2.3 
where I will stay.

Michael.