On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Pascal Quantin
<pascal.quantin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Le mardi 31 juillet 2012, Balint Reczey a écrit :
>
>> On 07/31/2012 09:59 AM, Pascal Quantin wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 31 juil. 2012 à 09:43, Anders Broman <anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> <mailto:anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Others have to comment on whether we require python or not but it would
>>>> be
>>>> nice if you attached your script to a bug report so we could have a look
>>>> at it
>>>> and have a record of it. I think it should be OK to require python 2.6
>>>> as the
>>>> lowest supported level to make things simpler.
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Anders
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> just for information the Linux development machine I have at work (Debian
>>> Lenny)
>>> is still packaging python 2.5 by default (unfortunately). It would be
>>> great if
>>> we could keep compatibility with older machines.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Pascal.
>>>
>> Hi Pascal,
>>
>> Lenny is oldstable and is not supported even by the Debian Project itself.
>> Please upgrade to Squeeze.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Balint
>
>
> Hi Balint,
>
> I would be happy to do so but the IT guys do not share my point of vue ;)
> For what it is worth, projects like Mercurial SCM (written mostly in Python)
> are still maintaining compatibility with Python 2.4.
The Django Web Framework also still has a release that's supported
under 2.4 (although their most recent release requires 2.5).
The original question was whether dropping support for 2.4 was OK.
Since even Debian oldstable has 2.5, I don't see that as a problem.
Moving all the way to 2.6 might be an issue though, so I suggest we
hold off on that for now.
Cheers,
Evan
