What's the status of Python 2.6 support?

[Matt Nordhoff]

Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>>>>>> "jam" == John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:
> 
>     jam> Matt Nordhoff wrote:
>     >> John Arbash Meinel wrote:
>     >>> Matt Nordhoff wrote:
>     >>>> Errm,
>     >>>> Over the past few months, all known issues with Python 2.6 were fixed,
>     >>>> right? 
> 
> All known issues raised by running the test suite have been
> fixed, yes (except for a minor one I'm about to fix soon but it's
> cosmetic).
> 
> I keep running the full test suite from time to time, especially
> before releases, but I've yet to automate that.
> 
>     >>>> But python2.6 hasn't been added to KNOWN_PYTHONS in the
>     >>>> "bzr" script,
> 
> That's right.
> 
>     >>>> so bzr will only use 2.4 or 2.5.
> 
> That's not. If the 'python' found in the path is above 2.4, we
> use it.
> 
> KNOWN_PYTHONS is used only if sys.version is lower than 2.4, so
> if your default python is above that you're not concerned.
> 
>     >>>> Was that an oversight,
> 
> It was and is worth fixing (thanks for pointing it out), but
> really it will trigger in pathological cases only (like in
> museums where every python version is in the path and the default
> one is lower than 2.4).

Ehhm. That's what I get for only skimming the code. :-P

Thanks for the correction.

>     >>>> or is there some reason not to use 2.6?
> 
> And even in the pathological cases, we will not use 2.6 if 2.4 or
> 2.5 is found first...
> 
>     >>>> 
>     >>> I'm pretty sure we should just add it to the list of
>     >>> KNOWN_PYTHONS 
> 
> Do we really want to keep that code ? AIUI it makes sense only in
> environments where the default python is 2.3.  I don't think
> there are still older pythons around without a newer one
> available and I doubt that environments can still propose
> python-2.3 as the default python...
> 
> Can't we just get rid of the REINVOKE dance in favor of a simple
> version check and leave distros handle the bang line ?
> 
>     >>> and make sure it starts getting tested properly.
> 
> That's a more important point than adding 2.6 to KNOWN_PYTHONS
> IMHO ;-)
> 
>     >>> That would also include building 2.6 packages on
>     >>> win32. I'm not sure if we want to default to py2.6 for
>     >>> the standalone yet,
> 
> Having been surprised more than once by unexpected failures due
> to 2.6, I think it make sense to wait for 2.6 availability on pqm
> before making 2.6 the default (and even then, we may want to have
> the test suite run regularly on windows first).
> 
>     Vincent

Thank you for the information. :-) It's good to know this isn't as
urgent as I thought.

(And sorry for quoting everything but only writing three lines...)
--