On 1/24/2020 9:14 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 24. 01. 20 14:02, Eric V. Smith wrote:
I think the concern is that with removing so many deprecated
features, we're effectively telling libraries that if they want to
support 3.9, they'll have stop supporting 2.7. And many library
authors aren't willing to do that yet. Will they be willing to in
another year? I can't say.
The concern is not that they don't want to drop 2.7 support, but that
is is a nontrivail task to actaually do and we cannot expect them to
do it within the first couple weeks of 2020. While at the same time,
we want them to support 3.9 since the early development versisons in
order to eb able to detect regressions early in the dev cycle.
Ah. So in 3.8, they kept code that had deprecation warnings so that they
could be compatible with 2.7. They'd like to now drop that code and be
3.9-only compatible, but they don't have enough time to do that because
they couldn't start that work as long as they were supporting 2.7. Do I
have that right?
If so, I'd be okay with postponing the removal of the deprecated code
until 3.10. But I don't think we should postpone it if the driver is so
that libraries can remain 2.7 compatible. That could go on forever. This
postponement would be a one-time thing.
Eric
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/VPKPA5JW2G22LB7A4OWESIL6O25GSOIK/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
