Le mardi 7 janvier 2020 13:25:04 UTC+1, E. Madison Bray a écrit : > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:30 PM Eric Gourgoulhon <egourg...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > 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. >
One may argue that there are already available Python 2 binaries: the 8.9 binaries. Is it worth to spend time and energy to build new Python 2 binaries? Wouldn't a message like "if you insist in running Python 2-only code, please use the 8.9 binaries" be sufficient? IMHO, most end users should now that Python 2 is dead (the younger ones even do not know that such a thing had existed) and that "print bla" should be changed to "print(bla)". Eric. -- 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/98c43f60-8613-4a09-b244-51b11a85cfd4%40googlegroups.com.
