> The context I was speaking is projects who still want to support 2.x This is also what I was speaking about. And to reach that goal, you have generally 3 opt

> The context I was speaking is projects who still want to support 2.x This is also what I was speaking about. And to reach that goal, you have generally 3 options: 1) write code that works with Python2 as well as Python3 2) maintain your code in Python2 and use 2to3 on release time 3) maintain your code in Python3 and use 3to2 on release time Given you don't want to do 1) for whatever reason, my argument is that 3) seems to be the preferable solution. It allows you to use our loved Python3 right now, while still supporting Python2. However, "in the wild" we see 2) way more often, and I don't understand why this is the case. Why do so many projects prefer 2) over 3)?