I am in favor of dropping py36 for np1.20, I think it would be good to lead by example.
Similar to pandas, the next Matplotlib release (3.4 targeted for Dec/Jan) will not support py36. Tom On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 9:18 AM Mark Harfouche <mark.harfou...@gmail.com> wrote: > Juan made a pretty good argument for keeping 3.6 support in the next > scikit-image release, let me try to paraphrase: > > - Since nobody has made the PR to explicitly drop python 3.6 from the > scikit-image build matrix, we will continue to support it, but if somebody > were to make the PR, I (Juan) would support it. > > As for supporting PyPy: it already exists in the build matrix AFAICT. > Breaking PyPy would be a deliberate action, as opposed to an accidental > byproduct of dropping CPython 3.6. > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020, 13:50 Sebastian Berg <sebast...@sipsolutions.net> > wrote: > >> On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 06:49 -0600, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote: >> > I like Ralf's email, and most of all I agree that the existing >> > wording is clearer. >> > >> > My view on the NEP is that it does not mandate dropping support, but >> > encourage it. In my projects I would drop it if I had use for Python >> > 3.7+ features. It so happens that we want to use PEP-593 so we were >> > grateful for NEP-29 giving us "permission" to drop 3.6. >> > >> > I would suggest that 3.6 be dropped immediately if there are any open >> > PRs that would benefit from it, or code cleanups that it would >> > enable. The point of the NEP is to short-circuit discussion about >> > whether it's "worth" dropping 3.6. If it's valuable at all, do it. >> > >> >> Probably the only thing that requires 3.7 in NumPy at this time is the >> module level `__getattr__`, which is used only for deprecations (and to >> make the financial removal slightly more gentle). >> I am not sure if PyPy already has stable support for 3.7 yet? Although >> PyPy is maybe not a big priority. >> >> We don't have to support 3.6 and I don't care if we do. Until this >> discussion my assumption was we would probably drop it. >> >> But, current master is tested against 3.6, so the main work seems >> release related. If Chuck thinks that is no hassle I don't mind if >> NumPy is a bit more conservative than NEP 29. >> >> Or is there a danger of setting a precedent where projects are wrongly >> expected to keep support just because NumPy still has it, so that NumPy >> not being conservative actually helps everyone? >> >> - Sebastian >> >> >> > Thanks all, >> > >> > Juan. >> > >> > On Mon, 2 Nov 2020, at 2:01 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: >> > > >> > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 7:47 AM Stephan Hoyer <sho...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2020 at 7:47 PM Stefan van der Walt < >> > > > stef...@berkeley.edu> wrote: >> > > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2020, at 18:54, Jarrod Millman wrote: >> > > > > > I also misunderstood the purpose of the NEP. I assumed it >> > > > > > was >> > > > > > intended to encourage projects to drop old versions of >> > > > > > Python. >> > > >> > > It was. It is. I think the NEP is very clear on that. Honestly we >> > > should just follow the NEP and drop 3.6 now for both NumPy and >> > > SciPy, I just am tired of arguing for it - which the NEP should >> > > have prevented being necessary, and I don't want to do again right >> > > now, so this will probably be my last email on this thread. >> > > >> > > >> > > > > Other >> > > > > > people have viewed the NEP similarly: >> > > > > > https://github.com/networkx/networkx/issues/4027 >> > > > > >> > > > > Of all the packages, it makes sense for NumPy to behave most >> > > > > conservatively with depreciations. The NEP suggests allowable >> > > > > support periods, but as far as I recall does not enforce >> > > > > minimal support. >> > > >> > > It doesn't *enforce* it, but the recommendation is very clear. It >> > > would be good to follow it. >> > > >> > > > > Stephan Hoyer had a good recommendation on how we can clarify >> > > > > the NEP to be easier to intuit. Stephan, shall we make an >> > > > > ammendment to the NEP with your idea? >> > > > >> > > > For reference, here was my proposed revision: >> > > > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/14086#issuecomment-649287648 >> > > > Specifically, rather than saying "the latest release of NumPy >> > > > supports all versions of Python released in the 42 months before >> > > > NumPy's release", it says "NumPy will only require versions of >> > > > Python that were released more than 24 months ago". In practice, >> > > > this works out to the same thing (at least given Python's old 18 >> > > > month release cycle). >> > > > >> > > > This changes the definition of the support window (in a way that >> > > > I think is clearer and that works better for infrequent >> > > > releases), but there is still the question of how large that >> > > > window should be for NumPy. >> > > >> > > I'm not sure it's clearer, the current NEP has a nice graphic and >> > > literally says "a project with a major or minor version release in >> > > November 2020 should support Python 3.7 and newer."). However happy >> > > to adopt it if it makes others happy - in the end it comes down to >> > > the same thing: it's recommended to drop Python 3.6 now. >> > > >> > > > My personal opinion is that somewhere in the range of 24-36 >> > > > months would be appropriate. >> > > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > Ralf >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> > > NumPy-Discussion@python.org >> > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> > > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> > NumPy-Discussion@python.org >> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> NumPy-Discussion@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > -- Thomas Caswell tcasw...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
