3 ms·
Are you referring to that "Python 2.8" thing [1] that happened some years ago? A comment from PSF [2] makes it clear that they don't have any issue with people
by avian 7y ago
Are you referring to that "Python 2.8" thing [1] that happened some years ago? A comment from PSF [2] makes it clear that they don't have any issue with people continuing to develop their Python 2 codebase further. It is what their open source explicitly permits after all.
They do have issue with people using a trademarked name and not making it clear that their work isn't endorsed by the Python Foundation.
[1] https://www.naftaliharris.com/blog/why-making-python-2.8/ https://www.naftaliharris.com/blog/why-making-python-2.8/
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13147972 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13147972
- CJefferson 7y agoFor me, if I want most existing python2 programs to work, I'd want to release my program as called "python", so "#!/usr/bin/env python" continued to work. If I'm not allowed to do that, then you are already adding a lot of friction to continuing to support existing python installs. Although, I wonder if you could claim you need to call it that for the programs to work?