Asking for prophecy

[andrew cooke]

3 and 2.6 are compatible.  so develop on 3, to make sure you don't use old
junk, and then switch to 2.6 if you need to.  there are a few wrinkles in
doing so, but it is not a big problem.

3.0 is a nicer language.  it's cleaner and more consistent.  i think
important libraries will move there.  no-one wants to do a perl.  it's the
likely future and you can always jump back to 2.6 if needed.

and in the long term, we will all die.

andrew


Stefan Spoettl wrote:
> In the pass it was always a good idea to use the newest Python verison for
> starting the development of a new application. First one could benefit
> from the additional features and second one could be sure that the
> community would have been passing during development.
>
> Nowadays we have at least three Python versions (2.5, 2.6, 3.0) on our
> machines and - damned! - I really don't know which version I should use
> for my next development. The Unix-like systems as much as the major part
> of well maintained third party libraries are remaining "penetrantly" on
> 2.5. Why the vangard of the community don't like to use at least 2.6 for
> bridging to the future Python? Is this the mutiny against the empery of
> the BDFL or is the vangard just asking for some more time? If I want to
> attest my personal attachment to the king by using 3.0, what will happen?
> Will I be deserted someday?
>
> Stefan--
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>