First of all, it's not evil so let's not get crazy. "The main reason for Python 2 users to not switch to Python 3 is the lack of motivation/killer features". W

First of all, it's not evil so let's not get crazy. "The main reason for Python 2 users to not switch to Python 3 is the lack of motivation/killer features". Which says that users are familiar with what Python 3 has to offer but consider it not good enough. You could have lack of motivation because you're familiar and decide that you don't need it - or - you could have lack of motivation out of ignorance or misunderstanding about the benefits. Both are reasonable and if it's the second one, there would be benefit from being more proactive about directing people to switch and explaining the reasons. Why would you then jump to a conclusion that you have to be more proactive in directing people to switch to Python 3. Or even better, to stop adding features to what 81% of people use. Maintaining 2 lines of development does have a cost associated with it for the entire python community involved. I think overlooking this was part of the problem with choosing this python3 strategy to begin with. I personally would not have done it this way and I get what you're saying about continuing 2.7 line but I think it's too late and now 2.7 and 3.4 have improved to the point where the porting task is reasonable. I think at this point the community should just get it over with. I say this as someone who primarily develops on python 2.7 (mainly due to library dependencies) so I get where you're coming from.