Hi Derek, Thanks for your feedback.
My intention was to make python24 and python25 looks the same as possible, not to downgrade python24. I thoguht I would be confused if I upgraded python port from 2.4 to 2.5 and found that I cannot import zlib anymore. Yes, this is an FAQ but the thing is python24 and python25 don't have the same policy. However, I think you're right. This change would likely break existing systems badly. And I must confess I didn't expect there're people using MacPorts for enterprise. To lower this risk, I could resign python24 port to separate some of its standard modules and add them as dependencies, but I doubt you would like this idea. Thanks. On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:30 AM, Derek Harland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/03/2008, at 8:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 00:22:42 +0900 > > From: js <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [MacPorts] #14342: python25 drops modules by default, but > > python25 doesn't > > To: "Markus Weissmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: MacPorts Developers <macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org> > > > > Apparently more people like this change. > > I'll get back to trac ticket and start working on this. > > I'm not sure I particularly like this proposed change. As I > understand it, you explicitly want to *downgrade* the functionality > of python24 to make it more like python25, by for example, removing > hashlib and zlib. > > I cannot understand the logic of this. This can only conceivably > break python24 installations. Even if all existing py-* ports are > altered to bring in extra required dependencies, peoples (and > institutions) own proprietary code that previously assumed the > existence of these standard libraries will break. And that will > annoy them greatly. > > Why are you proposing to explicitly *downgrade* python24, instead of > *upgrading* python25? > > I also do not buy into the inference that's been made in this thread > in the past that more people must be using python25 than python24. > For institutions with large proprietary codebases (eg financial > companies), shifting python versions *is* a costly business that is > not worth the often negligible benefit. I would suggest that many > are still running more code off 2.4 than 2.5 (companies I have been > involved with have moved from 1.5->20->2.2->2.4->2.6). I'm not > suggesting many such companies run code on OSX, but mine certainly is. > > derek. > > _______________________________________________ > macports-dev mailing list > macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org > http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev > _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev