2.7 & 2.6 are similar enough, I don't see any reason to create both if its
not trivial...
On Sep 2, 2012 7:36 PM, "Itzik Kotler" <xorni...@gmail.com> wrote:
Not high priority, but is something useful.
Where I work, we have several old virtual machines (some are build
machines, others used mostly for continuous integrations and so forth) that
run Ubuntu 10.x, where the default python version is 2.6.
Nobody wants to upgrade them since it's a hassle, and when we want to write
code that will run on these machines as well, we have to use 2.6 syntax.
I think that this is a pretty common situation in tech firms that have been
around for a while.
> Not high priority, but is something useful.
> Where I work, we have several old virtual machines (some are build
> machines, others used mostly for continuous integrations and so forth) that
> run Ubuntu 10.x, where the default python version is 2.6.
> Nobody wants to upgrade them since it's a hassle, and when we want to
> write code that will run on these machines as well, we have to use 2.6
> syntax.
> I think that this is a pretty common situation in tech firms that have
> been around for a while.
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:00 AM, TL <gsog2...@gmail.com> wrote:
You can, but it's not available through synaptic - you have to build it
from source.
It's not a big deal, but is never an issue - since everything supports
python 2.6 :)
In our day-to-day, this usually means replacing dictionary comprehensions
with dict( list comprehension).
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:48 AM, nir izraeli <nir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> why can't you install 2.7 as an additional version and run the script with
> it?
> On Sep 3, 2012 7:00 AM, "Guy Adini" <guyad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not high priority, but is something useful.
>> Where I work, we have several old virtual machines (some are build
>> machines, others used mostly for continuous integrations and so forth) that
>> run Ubuntu 10.x, where the default python version is 2.6.
>> Nobody wants to upgrade them since it's a hassle, and when we want to
>> write code that will run on these machines as well, we have to use 2.6
>> syntax.
>> I think that this is a pretty common situation in tech firms that have
>> been around for a while.
>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:00 AM, TL <gsog2...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think Pythonect can run on 2.6 "AS IT IS", the only problem is that
setup.py is using 'setuptools' which is the default for 2.7 module (while
'distutils' is the default for 2.6 and below).
I will open a "feature request" ticket on Supporting Python 2.6
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Guy Adini <guyad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You can, but it's not available through synaptic - you have to build it
> from source.
> It's not a big deal, but is never an issue - since everything supports
> python 2.6 :)
> In our day-to-day, this usually means replacing dictionary comprehensions
> with dict( list comprehension).
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:48 AM, nir izraeli <nir...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> why can't you install 2.7 as an additional version and run the script
>> with it?
>> On Sep 3, 2012 7:00 AM, "Guy Adini" <guyad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Not high priority, but is something useful.
>>> Where I work, we have several old virtual machines (some are build
>>> machines, others used mostly for continuous integrations and so forth) that
>>> run Ubuntu 10.x, where the default python version is 2.6.
>>> Nobody wants to upgrade them since it's a hassle, and when we want to
>>> write code that will run on these machines as well, we have to use 2.6
>>> syntax.
>>> I think that this is a pretty common situation in tech firms that have
>>> been around for a while.
>>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:00 AM, TL <gsog2...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Itzik Kotler <xorni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think Pythonect can run on 2.6 "AS IT IS", the only problem is that
> setup.py is using 'setuptools' which is the default for 2.7 module (while
> 'distutils' is the default for 2.6 and below).
> I will open a "feature request" ticket on Supporting Python 2.6
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Guy Adini <guyad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You can, but it's not available through synaptic - you have to build it
>> from source.
>> It's not a big deal, but is never an issue - since everything supports
>> python 2.6 :)
>> In our day-to-day, this usually means replacing dictionary comprehensions
>> with dict( list comprehension).
>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:48 AM, nir izraeli <nir...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> why can't you install 2.7 as an additional version and run the script
>>> with it?
>>> On Sep 3, 2012 7:00 AM, "Guy Adini" <guyad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Not high priority, but is something useful.
>>>> Where I work, we have several old virtual machines (some are build
>>>> machines, others used mostly for continuous integrations and so forth) that
>>>> run Ubuntu 10.x, where the default python version is 2.6.
>>>> Nobody wants to upgrade them since it's a hassle, and when we want to
>>>> write code that will run on these machines as well, we have to use 2.6
>>>> syntax.
>>>> I think that this is a pretty common situation in tech firms that have
>>>> been around for a while.
>>>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:00 AM, TL <gsog2...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Itzik Kotler <xorni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pythonect (HEAD) is now running on Python 2.6
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Itzik Kotler <xorni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think Pythonect can run on 2.6 "AS IT IS", the only problem is that
>> setup.py is using 'setuptools' which is the default for 2.7 module (while
>> 'distutils' is the default for 2.6 and below).
>> I will open a "feature request" ticket on Supporting Python 2.6
>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Guy Adini <guyad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> You can, but it's not available through synaptic - you have to build it
>>> from source.
>>> It's not a big deal, but is never an issue - since everything supports
>>> python 2.6 :)
>>> In our day-to-day, this usually means replacing dictionary
>>> comprehensions with dict( list comprehension).
>>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:48 AM, nir izraeli <nir...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> why can't you install 2.7 as an additional version and run the script
>>>> with it?
>>>> On Sep 3, 2012 7:00 AM, "Guy Adini" <guyad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Not high priority, but is something useful.
>>>>> Where I work, we have several old virtual machines (some are build
>>>>> machines, others used mostly for continuous integrations and so forth) that
>>>>> run Ubuntu 10.x, where the default python version is 2.6.
>>>>> Nobody wants to upgrade them since it's a hassle, and when we want to
>>>>> write code that will run on these machines as well, we have to use 2.6
>>>>> syntax.
>>>>> I think that this is a pretty common situation in tech firms that have
>>>>> been around for a while.
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:00 AM, TL <gsog2...@gmail.com> wrote:
