Hi Nyall,
>> Until recently [2], such a constraint did not even exist [3] (other than
>> a rather broad "Python 3.X"). Now, you're technically sort of supporting
>> 3.7 to 3.9, although it has not been documented anywhere as far as I
>> know other than in PRs and issues etc. - please correct me if
>
> Until recently [2], such a constraint did not even exist [3] (other than
> a rather broad "Python 3.X"). Now, you're technically sort of supporting
> 3.7 to 3.9, although it has not been documented anywhere as far as I
> know other than in PRs and issues etc. - please correct me if I am wrong.
Hi Nyall,
> we have absolutely no control
> over the python versions used by many QGIS users. E.g. as a Fedora
> user I've had Python 3.9 for months
is not it safe to say that a clear majority of the user base is running
Windows where you do have full control?
Besides, even in the Linux space, h
Nyall,
I agree with you on the Linux side, but we make an explicit choice on the
Python version shipped with Windows.
Cheers,
Pedro
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 08:11:43 +1000 Nyall Dawson
wrote
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 08:06, Pedro Camargo wrote:
> >
> > Hi Sebastian & Nyall,
> >
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 08:06, Pedro Camargo wrote:
>
> Hi Sebastian & Nyall,
>
> It is clear that Sebastian knows a LOT more about the issues at hand than I
> ever will, but I think it is worthwhile to expand on the particular issues I
> have found regarding AequilibraE.
>
> 1. The most importan
Hi Sebastian & Nyall,
It is clear that Sebastian knows a LOT more about the issues at hand than I
ever will, but I think it is worthwhile to expand on the particular issues I
have found regarding AequilibraE.
1. The most important functionalities of the software depend on a compiled
extension
Hello,
I have posted this to the users' list, but apparently, this is the right place
to go (thanks for pointing that out, Nicolas.
I have noticed that QGIS 3.18 for Windows has shipped with Python 3.9, after
having updated to 3.8 just a couple of versions ago.
As a plugin developer, it
