4 ms·
I consider Python 3 a huge benefit for a similar reason: I can avoid or charge $$$ for people still using 2.6 (e.g. on ancient RHEL). There's always somebody. 2
by guitarbill 10y ago
I consider Python 3 a huge benefit for a similar reason: I can avoid or charge $$$ for people still using 2.6 (e.g. on ancient RHEL). There's always somebody. 2.6 is pretty sucky, not to mention unsupported by the PSF.
If you support 2.7, some "clever" manager or client will say that 2.6 support surely isn't so unreasonable. It is. 2.7 is legacy only now IMO.
- lima 10y agoI'm happily using and deploying Python 3.6 on CentOS 6 using pyenv. You don't have to use the system Python unless there's a policy requiring you to do so.
- guitarbill 10y agoI agree, and EPEL works fine on RHEL, too. But it wouldn't be enterprise without some BS rules. Hence why compatibility "issues" are such a blessing for detecting enterprise BS early on.
- lima 10y agoYou can get a more recent Python from Software Collections, too: https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/?search=python https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/?search=python Up to Python 3.5 and 3.6 will probably follow shortly after release. This is blessed and QA'd by Red Hat themselves, so it's as good as it gets. "My distro only has Python 2" has to be one of the worst excuses not to use Python 3 :-) Obvious exception are systems tools (did you know that Ansible modules have to compatible with Python 2.4 since that's what CentOS 5 uses?). But those are the absolute minority.