RE: [Docutils-develop] Re: Updates to Docutils

[Tony J I. (Tibs) <to...@ls...>]

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.)