[please do not top-post] On 24.07.2015 11:00, Stefan Hett wrote: > In case that helps with the decision making process: > Debian 5.0 (lenny - no longer supported): py 2.5 > Debian 6.0 (squeeze - current oldoldstable): py2.6 > Debian 7.0/8.0/9.0 (wheezy/jessie/stretch - currently > oldstable/stable/testing): py2.7
The "very old enterprise versions" are probably RHEL 6 and SuSE 10; both are still in wide use. > So even this very conservative Linux distribution is supporting py2.7 > for the past two years (and with the backporting branch I assume even > squeeze supports 2.7 which would make it a supported platform for the > pat 4 years on that distribution). > > Source: > https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=python&searchon=names&suite=all§ion=all >> On 23.07.2015 17:01, Bert Huijben wrote: >>> I like this proposal... but I'm wondering in what case Linux build >>> environments need python. Those very old enterprise versions are >>> unlikely to have python 2.7 or newer. >> >> When building from a tarball, you only need Python to run the test suite. >> >> There are certain edge cases in the Python syntax where it's almost >> impossible to be compatible with both 2.5/2.6 and 3.x. Because of >> that, and because 2.6 is no longer supporter by the Python devs, it >> makes sense to stop supporting those versions in 1.9/trunk. >> >> Those very old enterprise versions will just have to be upgraded, IMO. >> >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> From: Branko Čibej <mailto:br...@wandisco.com> >>> Sent: 23-7-2015 11:02 >>> To: dev@subversion.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: 1.9.0 minimal Python version >>> >>> On 23.07.2015 10:30, Stefan Hett wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> >>>> - For 1.9, it's a little late to make any changes, but I would >>> >>>> consider >>> >>>> dropping py2.5 support (and converting to the 'except' 'as' >>> >>>> syntax), >>> >>>> since for 1.9 py3 support is more important than py2.5 support. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Thoughts? >>> >> I'd rather not mess with the 1.9 branch at this point ... we're >>> so close >>> >> to the release (I hope). >>> >> >>> >> -- Brane >>> > as a thought for the 1.9 case: >>> > In case you do not want to drop py2.5 support for 1.9 because it's >>> > released stating that minimum support already, would it be an option >>> > to still support py3 in a following patch (1.9.1)? For instance by >>> > providing py-script versions for older as well as later versions? >>> > >>> > Reasoning would be that given that SVN-versions have a lifetime of >>> > roughly 2 years before the successive version is released it'd be >>> > quite a limitation if that'd only work with a very old python >>> version... >>> > >>> > As an alternative approach: You'd also consider mentioning a minimum >>> > requirement of python 2.6 just in the docs (no code changes yet) and >>> > then release 1.9.1 with the actual "fixes". So technically then even >>> > post release you would not change the minimal system requirements. >>> > >>> > (just some thoughts from a user's point of view, if that input would >>> > be of any benefit) >>> >>> Daniel and I have just been chatting about this on IRC, and we agreed >>> that it makes sense to just drop 2.5/2.6 support for 1.9 and trunk; the >>> proposal is that we declare support for 2.7, and at some point make >>> 1.9.x and trunk compatible with both 2.7 and 3.x. >>> >>> -- Brane >> >