On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:59 AM, Jim J. Jewett wrote: >For many people -- particularly those who haven't ported yet -- 3.x >will mean 3.3+. There are some who will support 3.2 because it is a >LTS release on some distribution, just as there were some who supported >Python 1.5 (but not 1.6) long into the 2.x cycle, but I expect them to >be the minority. > >I certainly don't expect 3.2 to remain a primary development target, >the way that 2.7 is. IIRC, the only ways to use 3.2 even today are: > > (a) Make an explicit choice to use something other than the default > (b) Download directly and choose 3.x without OS support > (c) Use Arch Linux
On Debian and Ubuntu, installing Python 3.2 is easy, even if it isn't the default. However, once installed, 'python3' is Python 3.2. I personally think Python 3.2 makes for a fine platform for new code, and just as good for porting most existing libraries and applications to. You can get many Python 3.2 compatible packages from the Debian and Ubuntu archives by using the normal installation procedures, and generally, if there is a 'python-foo' package, the Python 3.2 compatible version will be called 'python3-foo'. I would expect other Linux distros to be in generally the same boat. There's a lot already available, and this will definitely increase over time. Although on Ubuntu we'll be planning future developments at UDS in May, I would expect Ubuntu 12.10 to have Python 3.3 (probably in addition to Python 3.2 since we can do that easily), and looking ahead at the expected Python release schedule, I'm expecting our next LTS in 2014 (Ubuntu 14.04) will probably ship with Python 3.4, either with or without the earlier Python 3 versions. So I think if you're starting a new project, write it in Python 3 and target Python 3.2. The only reason not to do that is if some critical part of your dependency stack hasn't yet been ported, and in that case, help them get there! IME, most are grateful for a patch or branch that added Python 3 support. >These are the sort of people who can be expected to upgrade. > >Now also remember that we're talking specifically about projects that >have *not* been ported to 3.x (==> no existing users to support), and >that won't be ported until 3.2 is already in maintenance mode. I really hope most people won't wait. Sure, the big frameworks by their nature are going to have more inertia, but if you are the author of a Python library, you can and should port *now* and target Python 3.2. Only this way will we as a community be able to build up the dependency stack so that when the large frameworks are ready, your library which they may depend on, will have a long and stable history on Python 3. -Barry _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
