Re: Should we close python3-port branch in scons bitbucket?
Russel Winder <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.programming.tools.scons.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 2016-05-03 at 22:03 -0400, Bill Deegan wrote: > Jason, > > > I think the initial plan was to use six, and we've switched to > futurize. > Russel - Please correct if I'm incorrect.. > Sounds right to me. General consensus amongst the Python folk I polled privately before deleting al the six stuff was that unless 2.5 and 2.6 were to be supported six was too heavyweight. With only 2.7 to support the future package is far more lightweight and provides fewer code differences. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder _______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 819 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAABCgAGBQJXMIKqAAoJENS91dLOzae4T98QAI1kSgArmedtqykoYPAaFeSV XHOaPJfOdZ2Olek0zNzJ5eOktUJLr54Izh8Gc0dShlqp11dCyPmwKnqqRKJPSl0b ZsfK7sLHQzBnXkIslUxqyq3yTssztb5T/gOfpGMBehX54oGUZnwQBCw4h1DprWwD M42a/uDJReg8MJ/9U2PsPJYjwI/wwCO87e0jW9hk92t/RnHIvrxPZx54QMchZ3Dz 5mo9AnrJCk3/FKvHeSaYTvrKjuZKz0KPiSIWPdbH2jwR4qb42kIvNqaTVO4pfrzM LMwcmhTCfeVPfQ2BjADsaKHPBGLSgnMSDinPRdlqAMd9uta13ZC/+LpuHib9UJxx 63o08zvC3HQ8ODMZAG6zKKzLAMG22rAaodMMmgoTQGXjgcFeJsoOn40YPcamrrP7 6+u1wC1+Oz99apTWVkG5NTsRnznekRNVuuh09ijbs8nkNUm6B1swQZp/mjmn8+Ab b9B2CJIcox+6i2ghyaR5eEcPu7VoOymiQLscCPn10Nqq42WLqp+iMP7tuPMhbh0x P/QaGKSVeXFWAOe8v+BfWi5bNIpdn3xU7b5k/93YjC4CpTTqY4LYGZt4+9NjlDar D2nLQryGc7s56jLX2qAuDkeR4yz4ry0Te1yZ1S978U5iZ6OP08gj0reWnD/P9/Pl YwSMbPW0XP9uqtv3/s7u =Q7iG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----