I do not complain. Complaining is like "Uncle Bert was totally drunk again and fell down the stairs and broke is arm and I expect him to change in order to make

I do not complain. Complaining is like "Uncle Bert was totally drunk again and fell down the stairs and broke is arm and I expect him to change in order to make me happy." Or "Frank did lend my car again and damaged it, and I told him again that I do not like that". What I do is observing things and drawing consequences. "Sorry, Frank, you can't have my car." And: "Well, Uncle Python does of lot of breaking changes, so I do not better use it for long-lived projects which I do not want to constantly fix. Maybe I could have a look around what languages do manage this better?" This is not, I think, an attitude I am alone with. For example, the Python2 / Python 3 breakage led Konrad Hinsen, an earlier contributer to Numpy and Scientific Python, to explore Racket as a language for scientific computing: https://khinsen.wordpress.com/2014/05/10/exploring-racket/ https://khinsen.wordpress.com/2014/05/10/exploring-racket/ And more concretely, and perhaps pragmatical, when I start a project or include a library, I am critical about the stability the environment offers. For example, in some situation I used gevent in place of newer and perhaps fancier solutions because it was stable across the Python2/Python3 version bump, and I did not want neither myself or my coworkers to need to re-write that part. This does not mean I stop to use Python altogether. It is still useful for many applications. However for writing new library code, I will rather use something that is more likely to be stable.