On Apr 14, 2014, at 3:53 PM, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > On 4/14/2014 11:32 AM, Steve Dower wrote: > >> To put it up front, I'm totally against "CPython 2.8" ever becoming a >> real thing. Anything that comes out should be seen as a migration >> path, not an upgrade path. I'll also admit I'm not heavily invested >> in working on it myself, but I had a number of conversations during >> PyCon (as well as being at the language summit) that puts me in a >> position to share the ideas and concerns that have been raised. > > I think it great that you 'volunteered' to be a neutral, hopefully trusted > go-between. > >> The main trigger was a conversation I had with two employees of a >> very large bank that has about 3000 Python users (not developers - >> mostly financial analysts) and 16 million lines of code running on >> 2.7. > > Sounds like a billion-dollar company. Are they a PSF sponsor, and a top-tier > one at that? If the company is profitable, it could afford to fund a half- to > full-time developer. > > > They are keen to migrate to 3.x but cannot afford to stop work >> entirely while their code is updated. > > Sounds like they are looking ahead several years and anxious to avoid the > 'comforable with XP' trap. > >> In describing the approach they'd like to take, they made me realise >> that there is definitely a place for a Python that is different but >> mostly compatible with 2.7, in a way that 2.7.x could not be. For the >> sake of having a name, I'll refer to this as "Python 2migr8" >> (pronounced "to migrate" :) ). > > This should be a separate project from pydev, even if under the PSF umbrella. > >> The two important components of Python 2migr8 would be the ability to >> disable 2.7-only features, and to do so on a module-by-module basis. > > A reasonable request of pydev would be for python-coded stdlib modules to be > updated as much as possible, if that has not already been done. No 'apply', > no 'except SomeException, e'. > >> However unfair >> and incorrect it may be, there is a perception in some businesses >> that open-source projects do not want contributions from them. > > For PSF/CPython, this is so untrue that it looks to me like an excuse to take > without giving back. This might be 'unfair and incorrect', but it is my > perception.
As someone who *has* given back, I can certainly understand why someone would feel that way. It often times *does* feel like CPython doesn’t want contributions. > >> I invited more than one business to have someone join python -dev and >> get involved during PyCon, and I heard that others did the same - it >> may not be at the level of employing a core developer full time, but >> it's the starting point that some companies will need to be able to >> become comfortable with employing a core dev. > > Let's hope some act on your invitation. > > -- > Terry Jan Reedy > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/donald%40stufft.io ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
