Is there some reason that recent Windows 3.6 releases don't included executable nor msi installers?

[Chris Angelico]

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 3:15 PM Mike Dewhirst <miked at dewhirst.com.au> wrote:
>
> On 29/05/2020 12:26 pm, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:57 AM Mike Dewhirst <miked at dewhirst.com.au> wrote:
> >> I am an example
> >>
> >> I installed all the Pythons on my Windows 10 dev machine (locked into
> >> Windows by having clients) but I'm also locked into Python 3.6.9 on my
> >> Ubuntu 18.04 production machines.
> > Be careful of assuming too much here. The general policy with most
> > Linux distributions is to number the version according to the oldest
> > component in it, but they are free to backport whatever changes they
> > choose. I have Python 3.4.4 and 3.5.3 on this system (Debian Stretch),
> > but the 3.5 is numbered "3.5.3-1+deb9u1" which implies some collection
> > of additional patches. (I'd have to dig deep in the changelogs if I
> > cared exactly *which* patches.)
> >
> >> After chasing down an obscure problem I decided to go back to Py36 on
> >> Windows to be using the same versions in dev as in prd. I couldn't find
> >> an installer on python.org so I retrieved one (3.6.5) from my archives.
> > That'd be the same feature version, but depending exactly what the
> > problem is, there might not be *any* Windows build that exactly
> > corresponds.
> >
> >> If I was asked to suggest a guide for which versions ought to get a
> >> Windows binary I would look at the most popular LTS *nix distros and
> >> keep Windows binaries in step just to support people like me who cannot
> >> live with too much Windows clutter. Think of it as deeply humanitarian
> >> generosity.
> > Even if that were possible, who are you asking to do this? Whose time
> > is going to be put into finessing every point release to make sure
> > it's still buildable on Windows?
>
> I was careful to not ask anyone to do anything. "If I was asked ..."

You said that certain versions of Python "ought to get" Windows
binaries. They don't appear out of nowhere.

> The only reason I took up Python (after being burned by proprietary tool
> makers) was because it was promised to run on pretty much everything.
> Especially Apache platforms - which also run on Windows.

It does.

> It would be handy if Microsoft delivered Windows with Python installed
> but what can you expect from them if they can't see demand for it.

You can get Python from the Windows App Store or whatever they call it.

> There are lot of Python people working on Windows and they do so because
> they have no choice. Windows is simply the dominant platform. That's
> where most clients live.

And current versions of Python are easily available. It's just that
there's a limit to how many different versions people are willing to
go to the effort of building Windows binaries for.

You can easily get any GA release of Python for any supported
platform. Prerelease versions, old versions, or locally patched
versions, generally require that you build them yourself (regardless
of the platform).

ChrisA