On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 11:28 AM Michael Downey N2UN <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Roger, > > On Fri, May 8, 2020, at 08:59, Roger Hill wrote: > > What I don't understand with the current move to produce a 'flatpack' > > version of chirp, is why the effort is not being expended to migrate > > chirp to version 3 of Python. Python version 2 is end of life. Period. > > I'd agree. Python 2 won't be supported any more which could prove > problematic in many ways. IMHO, shipping a flatpak so Python 2 can still be > provided should be seen more as "life support" and not a cure, which should > still be a high priority for those that are able to do so. (We should > remember that Python 3 was first released in December 2008.) :-) > And Gtk2 (and by extension pygtk2) are pretty ancient, so it would be good to transition to Gtk3 at the same time. The skills to create a flatpak are likely different than those needed to > migrate to Python 3, so the efforts need not be mutually exclusive. There > is an argument one could make for sticking with the flatpak approach even > when Python is upgraded. > Very true. Thanks, Richard KF5OIM
_______________________________________________ chirp_users mailing list [email protected] http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_users This message was sent to [email protected] at [email protected] To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected]
