[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Minimum Python for swig-py bindings

From: Max Bowsher <maxb1_at_ukf.net>
Date: 2007-10-12 01:04:26 CEST

Eric Gillespie wrote:
> glasser@tigris.org writes:
>
>> Author: glasser
>> Date: Mon Oct 8 14:24:21 2007
>> New Revision: 27029
>>
>> Log:
>> For SWIG-Python tests, use unique names for temp repositories, so that
>> multiple executions of the test suite don't stomp on each other (or on
>> future executions: client.py doesn't really clean up after itself).
>>
>> (tempfile.mkdtemp would be better than tempfile.mktemp, but
>> subversion/bindings/swig/INSTALL claims we need to support way back to
>> Python 2.0.)
>
> mkstemp is new in 2.3, which is over four years old. How many
> people are upgrading to svn 1.5 while keeping a four-year-old
> Python? Not that many. If we could at least move up to 2.2,
> then we could use new-style classes for classes like
> svn.delta.Editor and svn.ra.Callbacks .
>
> I see dlr talking in another thread about bumping the
> requirements for the Java binding.
>
> I see no reason for the Python binding to be stuck in 2000.

I think we should *definitely* move up to Python 2.2 at least, and would
be totally ok with us moving up to Python 2.3.

Max.

Received on Fri Oct 12 01:12:08 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.