6 ms·

> However that's not what you're complaining about. You are complaining about is that you want others to support python2 forever, just as you may want browsers/

> However that's not what you're complaining about. You are complaining about is that you want others to support python2 forever, just as you may want browsers/sites to support `alert()`, the `<blink>` tag and IE 6.0 forever. However that's not how the world works. Incorrect. You have to understand that I am not a Python user, and don't a priori care what they do with the language. I only become annoyed when something breaks on its own, or if changing one unrelated thing breaks other unrelated things. This happens for a variety of reasons: 1. Either date-based breaking, or patch releases designed just to throw up deprecations, and breaking the tools you actually use. 2. Packages and or binaries disappearing from package managers, such that even if I have a pinned version and I make no changes, an accidental cache invalidation can now break the entire image. 3. The fact that updating one utility may break others (either because you need to figure out this python symlinking issue or whatever). 4. Python causing discontinuities that don't exist in other bundled build tools. Going from buildpacks:x to buildpacks:y, to get a new feature in A, usually doesn't affect B, but in the specific case of Python, means the installed version might change and break a bunch of stuff. 5. Python 3 changes often being bundled with breaking API changes in app updates, making "upgrading to Python3" a uniquely involved challenge for each one. If you deprioritize "fault" for a second, such that we're not deciding who's to blame here (whether it's the transition plan by the language devs, the library or app authors, the distribution handlers, or even end users like me), you have to reconcile the fact that this is a unique situation to python. I am not describing the woes of development in general. I am describing a very python-specific set of experiences for non-python users. I did not out of nowhere decide to get angry at a language I don't use. This is the result of a repeated set of circumstances that just aren't happening elsewhere. As has been mentioned throughout this thread, it is further upsetting that a lot of this could have been avoided. The fact that there are things that could have been done differently to make the long tail effect less painful is fairly disappointing. At the end of the day, I don't need a list of solutions. I've implemented them all, don't worry. I've gone through and read the 500-thumbs-upped threads of people repeatedly running into this exact same problem, either found an easy workaround or taken the time to update the config files for a tool that rudely put itself at the front of my priorities list in order to fix the build, or found a way to remove the utility in question completely. This is not me coming on here trying to figure out how to move forward. This is me identifying a clear pattern, and sharing what I believe to be is a common conclusion: putting "python" in the "cons" column when considering a tool. I come from the node world. There's plenty of people that do the same for node. Some of it I consider fair, others not. But I make no illusions about one fact: if we want to change that perception, it's up to us to earn that by making the experience better going forward, not by explaining to people why their experience actually isn't real. For example, if there is a simple solution, if you just were familiar with the ecosystem, then LOG IT WHEN THE ERROR HAPPENS. If the person has to go to stack overflow and see a thousand other people running into the same thing, then you've failed. > However that's not what you're complaining about. You are complaining about is that you want others to support python2 forever, just as you may want browsers/sites to support `alert()`, the `<blink>` tag and IE 6.0 forever. However that's not how the world works. This is also hilarious since you had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find the only instances of "non backwards compatible" features in JS/HTML, an environment notorious for backwards compatibility. Also, `alert` may still stay in.

orf 4y ago
Ok cool but all this is just complaining that your build system isn't hermetic and that's someone else's fault? Like, what? You want to "not care about any of this" but then get annoyed when that bites you in the ass? Avoid writing huge, long rambling comments and try to simplify your arguments to less than 100 words. You may find the fault, and the fix, becomes obvious. Start with trying to refute "The python2 executable still functions correctly as does all other code you have that relies on python2" without referencing anything specific to your build practices. > This is also hilarious since you had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find the only instances of "non backwards compatible" features in JS/HTML, an environment notorious for backwards compatibility. Also, `alert` may still stay in. Those where the first that came to mind. There are many others, and many more if you widen it to server-side JS.
- tolmasky 4y ago
  > Avoid writing huge, long rambling comments and try to simplify your arguments to less than 100 words. You may find the fault, and the fix, becomes obvious. If you don't want to read the comment, then also don't bother responding. The comment is long because I am explaining a death by a thousand paper cuts situation. Don't worry, Python isn't going to die just because I don't like it. You don't have to defend Python even if you don't feel like reading my comment. You can also just ignore it or come back to it when you have time to engage with it thoughtfully, instead of just asserting you are correct and having your only argument be that I can't fit my argument to the arbitrary word length you've come up with. > Those where the first that came to mind. There are many others, and many more if you widen it to server-side JS. You should stick to talking about Python. This is just not the case and not the culture of browser JS. It's honestly fairly disrespectful of the monumental work browser engineers have done to make that a reality. If you want to switch your argument to server-side JS (where blink and alert don't exist and you are thus leaving it completely as an exercise to the reader to come up with the similar situation), fine, but node 0.10 runs exactly the same today as it did 10 years ago. Again, the bar I am setting is low: have the unchanged thing still gettable and still runnable. I get it. When you work in a certain environment, you imagine all the problems it has must be common and all the benefits are unique. But that isn't the case with this particular problem.

orf 4y ago

Ok cool but all this is just complaining that your build system isn't hermetic and that's someone else's fault? Like, what? You want to "not care about any of this" but then get annoyed when that bites you in the ass? Avoid writing huge, long rambling comments and try to simplify your arguments to less than 100 words. You may find the fault, and the fix, becomes obvious. Start with trying to refute "The python2 executable still functions correctly as does all other code you have that relies on python2" without referencing anything specific to your build practices. > This is also hilarious since you had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find the only instances of "non backwards compatible" features in JS/HTML, an environment notorious for backwards compatibility. Also, `alert` may still stay in. Those where the first that came to mind. There are many others, and many more if you widen it to server-side JS.

tolmasky 4y ago
> Avoid writing huge, long rambling comments and try to simplify your arguments to less than 100 words. You may find the fault, and the fix, becomes obvious. If you don't want to read the comment, then also don't bother responding. The comment is long because I am explaining a death by a thousand paper cuts situation. Don't worry, Python isn't going to die just because I don't like it. You don't have to defend Python even if you don't feel like reading my comment. You can also just ignore it or come back to it when you have time to engage with it thoughtfully, instead of just asserting you are correct and having your only argument be that I can't fit my argument to the arbitrary word length you've come up with. > Those where the first that came to mind. There are many others, and many more if you widen it to server-side JS. You should stick to talking about Python. This is just not the case and not the culture of browser JS. It's honestly fairly disrespectful of the monumental work browser engineers have done to make that a reality. If you want to switch your argument to server-side JS (where blink and alert don't exist and you are thus leaving it completely as an exercise to the reader to come up with the similar situation), fine, but node 0.10 runs exactly the same today as it did 10 years ago. Again, the bar I am setting is low: have the unchanged thing still gettable and still runnable. I get it. When you work in a certain environment, you imagine all the problems it has must be common and all the benefits are unique. But that isn't the case with this particular problem.