[EPEL-devel] Proposal for Python 3 packaging in EPEL 7

[Nick Coghlan]

I added a comment to the proposal discussion page to indicate I agree
it's better to just go with full parallel stacks and not worry about
making use of the stable ABI at this point.

I'm not familiar enough with the EPEL build infrastructure to have a
strong opinion

On 01/13/2015 09:47 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> Guido van Rossum has, several times now, expressed his aversion to
> having "3.10". It is most likely that there will be "3.9" and then
> "4.0", even if that doesn't present any huge change (like 2.6->3.0 did).

Slavek is correct that the current plan is for Python to simply go 3.9
-> 4.0 rather than continuing with the 3.x series indefinitely. The
degree of change is expected to be comparable to any other X.Y -> X.Y+1
release, rather than being comparable to the 2.x -> 3.x situation.
Instead, the major version bump will largely just indicate whether other
code and materials have been suitably modernised to use 4.x idioms,
rather than still remaining compatible with earlier, by then legacy, 3.x
versions.

Tangentially related, I'm actually somewhat morbidly curious as to
what's going to break when 2.7.10 is published later this year :)

> [No, no, south is *obviously wrong*; moreover, it'll be metal, not wood...]

[TBH, I've always strongly favoured the use of besser bricks [1] for sheds.]

Regards,
Nick.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_masonry_unit

-- 
Nick Coghlan
Red Hat Hosted & Shared Services
Software Engineering & Development, Brisbane

HSS Provisioning Architect