3 ms·

My company had to spend a ton of engineering time to migrate to 3

• busterarm 5y ago
  Still not done. Plus the burden of having to upgrade applications that don't make sense to from a financial perspective is totally not cool.
  • treesknees 5y ago
    We've barely started (we produce embedded router/fw appliances.) We've written up our backlog items to start tackling it but when you're under a constant crunch to get features and bug fixes out the door, PM will never prioritize willingly introducing subtle bugs across the entire codebase unless there's an extremely strong reason to upgrade. Unfortunately "no longer receives security updates" isn't strong enough. Until we can't ship a new feature without Python 3, we'll be on 2 for a long time.
    • Izkata 5y ago
      We're in a similar state for web apps: No one wants to put extensive developer time on something with nothing new to sell.
  • whoknowswhat11 5y ago
    It's this + they broke stuff that didn't need to be broken + made it hard / impossible to target both 2 and 3 and/or code incrementally in 3 on top of a 2 code base. The other nightmare is if a dependency isn't actively maintained you have also port your DEPENDENCIES over. Straight waste of time in many many cases. And your PM is asking (fairly) what new cool feature do we get? And you say - the program will run more slowly after all this stupid work. And boy - did things run more slowly especially in the early version - you upgraded and then got crap as a result so PM is asking why all this work made things WORSE for users.