On 24 Mar 2014 15:25, "Chris Angelico" <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As has already been pointed out, this can already happen, but in an > ad-hoc way. Making it official or semi-official would mean that a > script written for Debian's "Python 2.7.10" would run on Red Hat's > "Python 2.7.10", which would surely be an advantage. And having it break on the official Windows and Mac OS X binaries would benefit end users, how? The position I am coming to is that the "enhanced security" release should be the default one that we publish binary installers for, but we should also ensure that downstream redistributors can easily do "Python 2.7 with legacy SSL" releases if they so choose. I'm happier forcing end users to rely on a redistributor to opt in to a lower security option than I am to knowingly publish too many additional releases with network security infrastructure that is (at best) rapidly approaching its use by date. Cheers, Nick. > > ChrisA > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ncoghlan%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
