duplicity-team team mailing list archive

[Kenneth Loafman <kenneth@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think we have to continue support of the 0.6 series for a while, open to
discussion.

As to 0.7, good idea.  New features can be added here, fixes go to both
series.

...Ken

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:54 AM, <edgar.soldin@xxxxxx> wrote:

> On 13.01.2013 02:25, Michael Terry wrote:
> > Hello!  Yet another thread on the slow march to Python 3 support.
> >
> > The last place we left it was that Ubuntu was considering throwing some
> effort behind porting duplicity and maintaining such a patch themselves.
>  That didn't happen for manpower reasons.
> >
> > But I notice that Red Hat just passed (Jan 8, 2013) the end of
> "Production 1" for RHEL 5 [1].  Which is the first milestone on the way to
> RHEL 5 end of life (which won't be fully dead until 2020).
> >
> > I believe that is the point in which duplicity bumped from Python 2.3 to
> 2.4 (the end of Production 1 for RHEL 4), right?
> >
> > I propose that after 0.6.21 ships, the next release be versioned 0.7.0
> with a minimum Python of 2.6.  And that we don't intend to make further
> 0.6.x releases unless we discover a data corruption issue.
> >
> > That way, we (I) can start working on patches that take use of 'future'
> imports and such with an eye towards eventually one of the 0.7.x releases
> working with Python 3 (while still keeping Python 2.6 compatibility).
> >
>
> sounds good to me. but let's wait a bit after 0.6.21 and decide
> considering the criticality of open bugs if we just do another 0.6 round or
> switch to 0.7 already.
> but generally yes.
>
> ..ede
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team
> Post to     : duplicity-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>