From: Tony J I. (Tibs) <to...@ls...> - 2003-01-03 08:48:18
|
David Goodger wrote: > ...that Python 2.1 didn't have the "compiler" package as > part of the standard library (it was a separate install), and > that's crucial to the Python Source Reader work that's ongoing. > Therefore I've decided to upgrade the minimum Python requirement > to 2.2 (2.2.2 recommended). I don't have any personal (!) objection to specifying 2.2, but it's surely easy enough to require the compiler package, and provide a reference copy on the docutils site for those who install without the appropriate bit of source/Tools/whatever. Whether there was significant *change* in the compiler code in the interim, though, which might also be influential, I can't remember. Of course, this might just be that "one thing" that's enough to tip your decision on which version of Python to go for. Tibs -- Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/ Give a pedant an inch and they'll take 25.4mm (once they've established you're talking a post-1959 inch, of course) My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.) |