Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #85596
| References | <54DCD8A5.9050907@yahoo.no> <20150212110506.39410d54@bigbox.christie.dr> <CANc-5Uz3SyYomPXfTG9pFA+87VAC8TnvGp--VT8F47PdaA8Jeg@mail.gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-13 04:26 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: Odd version scheme |
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18699.1423761972.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 4:19 AM, Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> wrote: > I believe this sort of lexicographical comparison wart is one of the reasons > the Python-dev gang decided that there would be no micro versions > 9. There > are too many similar assumptions about version numbers out in the real > world. I don't think the policy is quite that strong; 2.7.10 has already been scheduled, and there's sufficient resistance to a Python 4.0 that there's likely to be a 3.10; although some people are saying that it might be worth following 3.9 with 4.0, drop only stuff that's been deprecated for a long time (on par with the disallowing of string exceptions during 2.x), and basically dodge the whole issue. But yes, there's a general feeling that two-digit version components cause trouble, and it's usually easy enough to avoid them. ChrisA
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Odd version scheme Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-13 04:26 +1100
csiph-web