Upgrade 2.6 to 3.0

[joviyach]

I am fairly new to Python, the first version I loaded was 2.6. I have
since downloaded 3.0 and I was wondering what the best practice for
upgrading is? I am using Windows XP Pro for my OS.

Thanks,

Jim

 

[joviyach]

On Windows, X.Y.* all go in one directory (over-riding each other)
So the whole 2.6.* family should work just fine alongside the 3.0.*
family.  In just a bit, 3.0.1 is coming soon, correcting some problems
in 3.0, so if you do install 3.0, check in a few weeks for an update.
The 2 -> 3 change was pretty substantial, so it will be a bit until the
3.0 line gets lots of outside packages.

--Scott David Daniels
(e-mail address removed)

Thanks Scott, I will be lurking/hopefully contributing.

 

[Tim Rowe]

On Windows, X.Y.* all go in one directory (over-riding each other)
So the whole 2.6.* family should work just fine alongside the 3.0.*

Just don't try to have a 2.6 version of Idle and a 3.0 version of Idle
running at the same time! 2.6 WinPy and 3.0 Idle seem to coexist ok,
which is handy when I'm trying to get to grips with the differences
between versions..

 

[Giampaolo Rodola']

Just don't try to have a 2.6 version of Idle and a 3.0 version of Idle
running at the same time! 2.6 WinPy and 3.0 Idle seem to coexist ok,
which is handy when I'm trying to get to grips with the differences
between versions..

Just out of curiosity, am I the only one who think that switching to
3.x right now is not a good idea?


--- Giampaolo
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib

 

[Tim Rowe]

Just out of curiosity, am I the only one who think that switching to
3.x right now is not a good idea?

I'm looking at making the switch, but I'm put off by the lack of 3rd
party stuff such as PyWin (and I can't see a NumPy build for Python
2.6 yet, never mind 3.0). Unless all you want is in the standard
library, I think it's worth the general user holding back for a while
whilst the tool providers catch up.

 

[Steve Holden]

I'm looking at making the switch, but I'm put off by the lack of 3rd
party stuff such as PyWin (and I can't see a NumPy build for Python
2.6 yet, never mind 3.0). Unless all you want is in the standard
library, I think it's worth the general user holding back for a while
whilst the tool providers catch up.

Take a look at the recent threads on the topic of the 3.0.1 release on
the python-dev list. There is some feeling that the 3.0 release was
unsatisfactory in certain ways. Some of the issues (including removal of
some obscure features that should have been removed in 3.0) will be
taken care of in 3.0.1.

In addition to that expect a 3.1 release before too long (say, within
the next six months) that will address some performance issues not
addressed in 3.0.1 and provide other optimizations and perhaps a small
list of new features. 3.0 is of remarkably good quality for a ".0"
release. Expect even better things in the future.

If you want to write portable code you can put into production now and
move to 3.0 when appropriate then write for 2.6, and 2.7 when and if it
comes out. Compile it with the -3 option and rewrite until it stops
raising warnings. It will then be relatively easy to move to 3.x when
the third-party library support you need is available.

regards
Steve

 

[Aahz]

Just out of curiosity, am I the only one who think that switching to
3.x right now is not a good idea?

Hardly. I certainly wouldn't consider it for production software, but
installing it to play with probably is a Good Idea -- it's the future,
after all.