4 ms·
I am afraid that, the python community has messed up 2.x => 3.X transition. Until 3.3, there seemed no incentive to port your codebase to Python 3.X. Just to b
by ubernostrum 10y ago
I am afraid that, the python community has messed up 2.x => 3.X transition. Until 3.3, there seemed no incentive to port your codebase to Python 3.X.
Just to bring up a small counterpoint: I don't think anyone really expected the early 3.x releases to be used in production. They were, as I recall, intended primarily as proof-of-concept releases to let people start looking at what porting would involve, and to get feedback and make improvements in the 3.x series to make porting easier and production deployments nicer.
- ram_rar 10y ago> I don't think anyone really expected the early 3.x releases to be used in production. I see this as a huge red flag. Its ok, to break/experiment things until you reach 1.0. After that, the core development team must factor in the consequences of breaking backwards compatibility.
- ubernostrum 10y agoI think you're reading it wrong there; this is not a statement of "3.0 came out and then they kept breaking compatibility all the time until 3.3", it's a statement of "3.0 declared what the changes were so people could play with the new APIs, and then 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 spent time on performance and making porting easier so that people could actually port to and deploy on later 3.x releases".