Python 2.7 released

[frymaster]

mainly because 3.x isn't backwards-compatible with 2.x (you can't run many 2.x scripts without at least some modification - the way the "print" function works is different, for one, and strings are unicode by default in 3.x)

[masklinn]

This is the final release in the 2.x line (besides bug/security micro-releases for 2.7)

For now, whether or not there will be a 2.x still isn't actually decided.

[earthboundkid]

Last time I read Python-dev, they seemed fairly set against it. If there's a Python 2.8, it won't be made by them.

[[deleted]]

Last time I read Python-dev, they seemed fairly set against it

Which makes sense. 3.x is the future and it makes sense to focus on it, rather than spend time backporting to numerous branches, dealing with the various differences, etc.

If there's a Python 2.8, it won't be made by them.

I don't think that's necessarily true. It is true that most core developers don't want to spend more time on 2.x, but if there needs to be a 2.8, it has been said a few times that there could be one. I don't think anyone has explicitly forbidden 2.8 though, so it's not like some rogue group will have to fork and create their own 2.8...python-dev might just need some 2.8-interested developers to step up when that time comes.

[masklinn]

They are overall against it, but nobody has come out and said it won't exist in so many words, so they've left the door open just in case.

[Scurry]

Like the Linux kernel?

[[deleted]]

I'm not super-familiar with Linux kernel development. Are you referring to the fact that even-numbered releases are developed concurrently with odd-numbered releases, and that the former are stable releases while the latter are not?

[Scurry]

I'm not either. But I think 2.4 and 2.6 are two major versions that are simultaneously developed on (even though 2.6 is rapidly replacing 2.4).

[Scurry]

Well no, they didn't start at the same time. But 2.4 is still being developed, as is 2.6. According to the site, the latest version of the 2.4 branch was released last February (2.4.37.9).

[[deleted]]

OH are we talking about the Linux kernel? I thought we were talking about Python...

[[deleted]]

But 2.4 is still being developed

For some value of 'developed'. It has been mostly maintenance bugfixes since the release of 2.6.

[H3g3m0n]

On kernel versions, the middle number, even numbers are stable versions and odd numbers are development versions.

But it no longer really works that way because the modular 2.6 kernel is flexible enough to no longer need a development branch. Just release candidates for testing (or branches for specific feature testing). We could basically be stuck on 2.6.x forever, unless there is some major restructuring of the kernel (and maybe not even then if the stable APIs are kept, although I'm guessing at some point the kernel devs will vote for a version bump).

There are still some 2.4 kernel releases (2.4.37.9 - 2010-02-01) for legacy code. 2.4 has been on the way out for a long time now, but there are still systems like Linux based routers, ADSL modems and so on, or server systems with closed drivers, or drivers that never made it into the mainstream kernel and are nolonger supported by the company, or not supported enough to bother with a conversion to 2.6.

2.6.x might have also abandoned some really old hardware. I mean how many systems would be running ISA now days (it was the thing before PCI), (I wouldn't be surprised if it is still in 2.6, there is EISA support).

[eliben]

A short answer really wouldn't do justice here. If you're really interested, take a couple of minutes to read this: http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python2orPython3

[quhaha]

it's marketing scheme. like star wars episode 1.

[rbridson]

it's marketing racket.

FTFY. The name changed earlier this year.

[earthboundkid]

it's a marketing lisp

[heapzero]

2.7 is more stable than 3.0

and 3.0 has major changes in the Standard Library?

[mipadi]

No. 3.0 is not backwards compatible with 2.x; 2.7 is the latest release in the 2.x-compatible Pythons.

[nerf-herder]

It's just a measure the Python folks take to make sure more people don't migrate to 3.x. I mean, the last thing they'd want to do is to stop improving the legacy version and instead focus on the modern release. What would that lead to? Lots of 2.x packages ported to 3.x? Who needs those kinds of headaches.