On 9 April 2011 09:31, Kenneth Loafman <address@hidden
> I've not looked at Python 3. Only one question comes to mind that may be a
> serious impediment -- Is it possible to have a single source that is 2.x and
> 3.x compatible, or is this going to be a major rewrite?
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Michael Terry <address@hidden
>> Hello! I wanted to start a conversation about moving to Python 3. I
>> know this is far in the future likely, but it might be interesting to
>> plan around it.
>> Currently duplicity only requires Python 2.4, which is 4 years older
>> than Python 3.0. 3.0 is about as old as 2.6, so maybe it would make
>> sense that when we are considering a jump to Python 2.6, we might as
>> well also consider Python 3?
>> Of course there are dependencies to wait on as well. And the work has
>> to be done by someone.
>> It doesn't need to be all-at-once either, I believe. We could update
>> to 2.6 or 2.7 and use a program like py2to3 to generate the 3.0 code
>> until we're comfortable making the full jump?
>> Duplicity-talk mailing list
> Duplicity-talk mailing list