Re: Please do not drop Python 2 modules
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 19:14:02 +0300
- From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Please do not drop Python 2 modules
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 12:10:12AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> This cannot go on, and on, and on, and on... We have to send a clear
> message on the right direction, which is Python 2 removal. Yes, removal!
> Why are we even discussing this? Isn't it obvious?
It is not for us to decide what tools our users should use,
we should support them no matter what tools they have to use.
> Python 3 was released the 3rd of December 2008. 2020 is 12 years later.
> How many more years does one think we need until we send the message
> that yes, we should port our app/module to Python 3? Sorry, but legacy
> *must* die, as it doesn't have upstream support.
Why does legacy "*must*" die?
Upstream support is mainly relevant for security support.
In real life many of our users have to support huge amounts of code
written in Python 2.
There are big codebases written in languages like Tcl around,
so still using Python 2 doesn't strike me as exceptionally weird.
> To everyone that is vouching for more Python 2, are you volunteering for
> helping maintaining the Python 2 interpreter in Debian? It's not going
> to be trivial to maintain it 5 years after upstream stops...
Maintaining the Python 2 interpreter is actually reasonably trivial.
Three years after the release of jessie there has been one security
update for python2.7 in jessie, this is not a problematic package,
and there are other distributions who will create security fixes
for the Python 2 interpreter for many years to come).
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed