4 ms·

2.7 is a different language than 3.x. You could argue that 2.y is also a different language than 2.x but this is besides the point: as long as there is a compi

2.7 is a different language than 3.x. You could argue that 2.y is also a different language than 2.x but this is besides the point: as long as there is a compiler for that language and it works (for your definition of works) you don't need to translate your programs in another language just because you have money.

rocqua 9y ago
> you don't need to translate your programs in another language just because you have money. True, but if you know the support behind your current language is going to go away, it might be smart to migrate.
- crististm 9y ago
  Yes but this is a different argument. He could have said "if you are smart" instead of "if you have the money". See?
sametmax 9y ago
You don't need to upgrade your servers to the lastest linux kernel either. But in 10 years, you won't get any security update for it, unless you pay a lot of money for it. It will be the same for Python. You want the excellent and money making free work of volunteers ? Do your part. You don't want too ? It's ok. In 2020, plenty of companies will sale you services for the real market price of your technical debt.
- crististm 9y ago
  Is now 'ignoring security' the free pass that is thrown into every argument against opposing positions? I'm being facetious about that; but you know that security risks can be reasoned and mitigated with different means (sometimes less costly) than simply upgrading software.
  - sametmax 9y ago
    s/security/bug I don't think that centos 6 is bug free yet it EOL in 2010 too. Actually i'm using it right now and I'm positive it has at least one bug when running in virtualbox. My client won't upgrade. They pay support, expensive support, to keep their old version. In 2020 I'll open a shop to convert old Python code bases or fix bugs in them. I'll charge 4 times market rate. For me it's a net win that people don't migrate.
    - toyg 9y ago
      Sometimes I wonder if the opensource movement, with its perennial “update anxiety”, is actually busy generating an industry of legacy maintenance. In a way, it’s a natural extension of the original “development is free but you pay for support” idea, but I don’t think anyone openly elaborated it into a long-term revenue-generating strategy. It looks like a slam-dunk, to be honest, with the only caveat being that work is extremely unfashionable.
      - sametmax 9y ago
        It's not the opensource movement. It's IT in general. A lot of software stopped working with the windows 10 update that was forced on the users. Android breaks the API regularly by changing the permission game. The PSF has limited resources (3 million of dollar of budget) to exists (this includes running pypi and organising pyconf), but I think it's track record is quite good, even comparing to commercial products.
        vetinari 9y ago
        Actually, Android doesn't break the API, even by changing the definition of permissions. If you have a breakage, investigate your app manifest, what API version you are targeting. Android frameworks shim the old behaviors for the apps that declare the use of the old API versions.
        sametmax 9y ago

rocqua 9y ago

> you don't need to translate your programs in another language just because you have money. True, but if you know the support behind your current language is going to go away, it might be smart to migrate.

crististm 9y ago
Yes but this is a different argument. He could have said "if you are smart" instead of "if you have the money". See?

sametmax 9y ago

You don't need to upgrade your servers to the lastest linux kernel either. But in 10 years, you won't get any security update for it, unless you pay a lot of money for it. It will be the same for Python. You want the excellent and money making free work of volunteers ? Do your part. You don't want too ? It's ok. In 2020, plenty of companies will sale you services for the real market price of your technical debt.

crististm 9y ago
Is now 'ignoring security' the free pass that is thrown into every argument against opposing positions? I'm being facetious about that; but you know that security risks can be reasoned and mitigated with different means (sometimes less costly) than simply upgrading software.
- sametmax 9y ago
  s/security/bug I don't think that centos 6 is bug free yet it EOL in 2010 too. Actually i'm using it right now and I'm positive it has at least one bug when running in virtualbox. My client won't upgrade. They pay support, expensive support, to keep their old version. In 2020 I'll open a shop to convert old Python code bases or fix bugs in them. I'll charge 4 times market rate. For me it's a net win that people don't migrate.
  - toyg 9y ago
    Sometimes I wonder if the opensource movement, with its perennial “update anxiety”, is actually busy generating an industry of legacy maintenance. In a way, it’s a natural extension of the original “development is free but you pay for support” idea, but I don’t think anyone openly elaborated it into a long-term revenue-generating strategy. It looks like a slam-dunk, to be honest, with the only caveat being that work is extremely unfashionable.
    - sametmax 9y ago
      It's not the opensource movement. It's IT in general. A lot of software stopped working with the windows 10 update that was forced on the users. Android breaks the API regularly by changing the permission game. The PSF has limited resources (3 million of dollar of budget) to exists (this includes running pypi and organising pyconf), but I think it's track record is quite good, even comparing to commercial products.
      - vetinari 9y ago
        Actually, Android doesn't break the API, even by changing the definition of permissions. If you have a breakage, investigate your app manifest, what API version you are targeting. Android frameworks shim the old behaviors for the apps that declare the use of the old API versions.
        sametmax 9y ago