5 ms·

Somewhat interesting that "volunteer project no longer under active development" got changed to "unmaintained".

• killingtime74 7mo ago
  What euphemism do you prefer then...
  • kev009 7mo ago
    Undermaintained might be more suited since it does have life but doesn't appear commercially healthy nor apparently relevant to other communities.
    • dapperdrake 7mo ago
      Underphrased like a pro.
  • aragilar 7mo ago
    There's a difference between dead (i.e. "unmaintained") and low activity ("not under active development"). From what I can see PyPy is in the latter category (and being in that category does not mean it's going to die soon), so choosing to claim it is unmaintained is notable.
    • Hamuko 7mo ago
      Being three major versions behind CPython is definitely not a great sign for the long-term viability of it.
      • saghm 7mo ago
        I'm not sure "major versions" is the most correct term here, but I think your point is spot on
        • Hamuko 7mo ago
          For Python, 0.1 increases are major versions and 1.0 increases are cataclysmic shifts.
          • johndough 7mo ago
            I don't know about that. For me, f-strings were the last great quality-of-life improvement that I wouldn't want to live without, and those landed in Python 3.6. Everything after that has not really made much of a difference to me.
            • toyg 7mo ago
              That's like saying the last tax that affected you was passed in 2006...
              • johndough 7mo ago
                I don't understand. Could you elaborate?
                • fn-mote 7mo ago
                  It means there are lots of changes in each “minor” version that the poster is ignoring because they are not personally affected. Match case and even the walrus operator come to mind.
            • localuser13 7mo ago
              If you want your code to run, you need a python interpreter that supports the newest of your dependencies. You may not use features that came after 3.6 (though you obviously do), but even if just one dependency or sub-depdendency used a python 3.10 specific feature you now need interpreter at least this new.
              • johndough 7mo ago
                That is true, and it is also a huge pet peeve of mine. If more library maintainers showed some restraint it using the newest and hottest features, we'd have much less update churn. But on the other hand, this is what keeps half of us employed, so maybe we should keep at it after all.
      • aragilar 7mo ago
        I'd genuinely be curious what fraction of those changes actually requires porting to other Python implementations. The free-threading changes are inherently interpreter specific, so we can ignore those. A significant change in Python 3.12 is dropping "dead batteries", so that can be ignored as well. From what I can see, the main language changes are typing-based (so could have parser implications), and the subinterpreter support being exposed at the Python level (I don't know whether that makes sense for PyPy either). I think this hints that while certain area of Python are undergoing larger changes (e.g. typing, free-threading), there is no obvious missing piece that might drive someone to contribute to PyPy. Also, looking at the alternate (full) interpreters that have been around a while, PyPy is much more active than either Jython or IronPython. Rust-python seems more active than PyPy, but it's not clear how complete it is (and has going through similar periods of low activity). Would I personally use PyPy? I'm not planning to, but given how uv is positioning itself, this gives me vibes of youtube stating it will drop IE 6 at some unspecified time in order to kill IE 6 (see https://benjamintseng.com/2024/02/the-ie6-youtube-conspiracy/ https://benjamintseng.com/2024/02/the-ie6-youtube-conspiracy...).
        • mattip 7mo ago
          The problem is the million small paper cuts. The stdlib changes are not all in pure python, many have implications for compiled modules like _ssl. The interpreter changes, especially compatibility with small interpreter changes that are reflected in the dis module, also require work to figure out
      • stuaxo 7mo ago
        It's always been about that many versions behind. There is more churn in those versions than you'd think.
• maxloh 7mo ago
  For context, they have 2 to 4 commits per month since October [1]. The last release was July 2025 [2]. [1]: https://github.com/pypy/pypy/commits/main/ https://github.com/pypy/pypy/commits/main/ [2]: https://github.com/pypy/pypy/tags https://github.com/pypy/pypy/tags
  • johndough 7mo ago
    That seems reasonably active to me. You can't really expect more from an open source project without paid full-time developers.
• electroglyph 7mo ago
  much respect to the PyPy contributors, but it seems like a pretty fair assessment
  • swiftcoder 7mo ago
    9 months since the last major release definitely feels like a short time in which to declare time-of-death on an open source project
    • tempay 7mo ago
      It’s been a lot longer than that. There was a reasonable sized effort to provide binaries via conda-forge but the users never came. That said, the PyPy devs were always a pleasure to work with.
      • masklinn 7mo ago
        > It’s been a lot longer than that. pypy 7.3.20, officially supporting python 3.11, was released in july 2025: https://pypy.org/posts/2025/07/pypy-v7320-release.html https://pypy.org/posts/2025/07/pypy-v7320-release.html We're in March 2026. That's 9 months, which is exactly what GP stated. > There was a reasonable sized effort to provide binaries via conda-forge but the users never came. How is that in any way relevant to the maintenance status of pypy?
    • hobofan 7mo ago
      It is also lagging behind in terms of Python releases. They are currently on 3.11, which was released 3.5 years ago for mainline Python.
      • masklinn 7mo ago
        > It is also lagging behind in terms of Python releases. Which it has always been, especially since Python 3, as anyone who's followed the pypy project in the last decade years is well aware.