| 1 |
Sebastian Beßler wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 10.06.2010 07:36, schrieb Dale: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> To think the devs didn't believe this was going to cause some confusion. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
> There is a news regarding python 3 after the install of python 3. |
| 8 |
> It clearly says that is ok to have both installed parallel, and runnig |
| 9 |
> python-updater is recommended, but you should never ever set python 3 as |
| 10 |
> system default until further notice. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> On the dev-list putting python 3 into stable and how to handle it was |
| 13 |
> debated with many powerful emotions assigned. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> They knew what they did.. If how they handled that problem is good or |
| 16 |
> not is a other pair of shoes. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Greetings |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Sebastian |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Yep, I was part of that discussion so I know about it. News item or |
| 25 |
not, marking something as stable still confuses people when you are then |
| 26 |
told you can't use it. With most packages it would not matter much but |
| 27 |
when very little can use this package, it is sort of silly. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Dale |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
:-) :-) |
Archives