On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:30 PM Eric Gourgoulhon <egourgoul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Le lundi 6 janvier 2020 14:21:56 UTC+1, E. Madison Bray a écrit : >> >> >> I agree with Nils. There should be at least a one release deprecation >> period. Also, while I don't think we use any kind of real semantic >> versioning, I think we should name a Python 3-only release 10.0 as >> it's a very major backwards-incompatibility change. >> > > On the other hand, for the end user the major backwards-incompatibility > change already happened: a Python 2-only piece of code will break immediately > in any Sage 9.0 binary. Can we really say to the end user: "to solve your > issue, download SageMath sources and compile them with ./configure > --with-python=2" ? > As for developers, the Python 3 switch has been discussed for something like > 2 years, so what would be the point to extend that (effective) deprecation > period? (maybe I am missing something here)
For this very reason I think there ought to be Python 2 binary releases for 9.0 as well. I'm building both for Windows, but I'm not in control of the others. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAOTD34YHWWzviONKTikBSh_vqCmxt6pme6DCQb%3D7XXU0iqdELg%40mail.gmail.com.
