On Apr 5, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hm, did you read the link I cited? It's not so surprising that 3.0
> should have broken distutils, but what I found distressing is that
> they
> fixed distutils and then 3.0.1 broke it *again*. I stand by my
> opinion
> that Python 3 isn't stable yet.
Yeah, actually. From some of the talk I've seen on python-dev, it
sounds like 3.0.2 will be the last 3.0 release. 3.1 is in alpha, and
ready to start cleaning things up, afaict.
>> This means that users of PL/Python should not expect PL/Python to
>> automatically work with 3.0. Supporting 3.0 will be a new feature.
>> So it's OK to drop it from 8.4.
>
> One other thing that we'll have to seriously consider is whether we
> should package python3 as a separate PL, so that people can keep using
> their 2.x plpython functions without fear of breakage. I know that
> the
> Fedora guys are currently debating whether to treat it that way, and
> I suppose other distros are having or will soon have the same
> conversation. Six months from now, there will be some precedents and
> some track record for us to look at in making that choice.
I think this would be wise.
Any thoughts on the acceptability of a complete rewrite for Python 3?
I've been fiddling with a HEAD branch including the plpy code in a
github repo. (nah it dunt compile yet: bitrot and been busy with a 3.x
driver. ;)
