Stefan Spoettl wrote:
In the pass it was always a good idea to use the newest Python verison for starting the development of a new application. First one could benefit from the additional features and second one could be sure that the community would have been passing during development. Nowadays we have at least three Python versions (2.5, 2.6, 3.0) on our machines and - damned! - I really don’t know which version I should use for my next development. The Unix-like systems as much as the major part of well maintained third party libraries are remaining "penetrantly" on 2.5. Why the vangard of the community don’t like to use at least 2.6 for bridging to the future Python? Is this the mutiny against the empery of the BDFL or is the vangard just asking for some more time? If I want to attest my personal attachment to the king by using 3.0, what will happen? Will I be deserted someday?
It typically takes about a year before *most* 3-rd party libs have been converted. Windows binaries for C extentions tend to be slowest to arrive. Many people routinely skip 2.x.0 and wait to 2.x.1 both to skip initial bugs and wait for libraries. I have no idea if 2.6 conversions are slower than usual or not.
3.0 conversion was expected to be a bit slower. On the other hand, it is an opportunity to increase mindshare for libs which do make the conversion.
I expect usage of Py3 will increase noticeably when 3.1 comes out in a few months with some notable fixes and improvements.
I think there is at least half a chance that 2.7, which should arrive with 3.2, will be the last 2.x version.
In the meanwhile, use whichever one meets your needs. I am currently using 3.0, but have 2.5 loaded in case I want to do something that needs 3rd-party libs before they are available for 3.x.
Terry Jan Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
