Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
I guess I should change it to use explicit relative imports. The only problem
is that would drop support for python 2.4. Not sure if there are people using
the library in python 2.4 yet.
Original comment by nilton.v...@gmail.com
on 22 Dec 2012 at 9:20
I'd much rather see support for Python 3.3 than 2.4. Perhaps a good compromise
is to increment the version to 3.0 and support Python 3.x, keep 2.x as the
Python 2.x series.
Original comment by bradley....@gmail.com
on 22 Dec 2012 at 9:41
I've tested the change and Python 3.3 seems happy with it:
https://github.com/bradleyayers/python-progressbar/commit/c25e56619ca625344b7101
6c9dd7a7bbd5a67285
Original comment by bradley....@gmail.com
on 22 Dec 2012 at 9:44
Can you please submit the Python 3.3 compatible library to PyPi?
Original comment by sync.mar...@googlemail.com
on 1 Jun 2013 at 6:00
Yes please !
Original comment by james...@gmail.com
on 25 Sep 2013 at 12:38
Yes-yes please
Original comment by koukopoulos
on 10 Oct 2013 at 9:22
I uploaded to PyPi a version of python-progressbar that should work on Python
3.3. You can get it by running:
pip install progressbar33
Original comment by german.g...@gmail.com
on 29 Aug 2014 at 9:03
I'll just note - as a Python 3.4 user I was surprised to see that `pip install
progressbar` failed with an odd error (which lead me here). I have it working
with `pip install progressbar33`. Looking at the comment about Python 2.4
support - I'll note that Python 2.4's support was withdrawn in 2009, so it has
been unsupported for 6 years now.
Python 2.7 itself is unsupported in 4.5 years time. Python 3.4+ is the future
(and, well, the current for many of us). I'd strongly vote for dropping 2.4
support and letting 3.4 users enjoy this fine library without hunting through
bug reports.
Original comment by ianozsv...@gmail.com
on 4 Jun 2015 at 9:12
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
dou...@gmail.com
on 17 Dec 2012 at 1:31