On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 10:45 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So the question is rather: Do you want to disk a community split, or > > add forwards compatibility? > > I don't think the risk is big. As far as people start saying "I will > only support Python 3", or saying "I will not support Python 3" - that's > fine.
No, it isn't. That's the whole thing. It isn't fine. > In the latter case, people relying on the library either have to stay > with 2.x until all their dependencies get ported, or they will have > to contribute 3.x ports themselves to the developers. You are still only seeing this as a case of libraries with a small number of people developing them and making regular well defined releases. That is not how the world I am talking about looks. I repeat: I have no doubt the 2to3 approach works well in that case, if you want to support both 2.6 and 3.0. > So in short: no, the risk that the community splits is very small. No, it is a significant risk. Don't brush it away. We do NOT end up having a 2.x python world and a 3.x python world. The community doesn't have the resources to maintain momentum in a language if the energy is divided in half. -- Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting. http://www.colliberty.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
