[Numpy-discussion] Officially drop Python 3.6 from NumPy 1.20 (was: NumPy 1.20.x branch in two weeks)

Thu Nov 5 10:21:44 EST 2020

Hi all,

just to note: We discussed this yesterday briefly and decided to drop
official support for 3.6 in the 1.20 release.  We never had ambition to
support 1.20 and there seems advantage in dropping it, if mainly for
clarity and consistency with many other projects.

If you disagree with this decision, please just bring it up so we can
reconsider.

Cheers,

Sebastian

PS: We may keep testing on 3.6 for the moment, at least for PyPy for
technical reasons.

On Tue, 2020-11-03 at 11:58 -0800, Brigitta Sipocz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> For what it's worth, python 3.6 is also dropped for astropy 4.2 (RC1
> to be
> released in the next few days). We haven't yet formally adopted
> NEP29, but
> are very close to it peding some word smithing, and no one from the
> dev
> team was fighting for keeping support for 3.6. or numpy 1.16.
> 
> Cheers,
>  Brigitta
> 
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 10:53, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I am in favor of dropping py36 for np1.20, I think it would be good
> > to
> > lead by example.
> > 
> > Similar to pandas, the next Matplotlib release (3.4 targeted for
> > Dec/Jan)
> > will not support py36.
> > 
> > Tom
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 9:18 AM Mark Harfouche <
> > mark.harfouche at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Juan made a pretty good argument for keeping 3.6 support in the
> > > next
> > > scikit-image release, let me try to paraphrase:
> > > 
> > > - Since nobody has made the PR to explicitly drop python 3.6 from
> > > the
> > > scikit-image build matrix, we will continue to support it, but if
> > > somebody
> > > were to make the PR, I (Juan) would support it.
> > > 
> > > As for supporting PyPy: it already exists in the build matrix
> > > AFAICT.
> > > Breaking PyPy would be a deliberate action, as opposed to an
> > > accidental
> > > byproduct of dropping CPython 3.6.
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020, 13:50 Sebastian Berg <
> > > sebastian at sipsolutions.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 06:49 -0600, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote:
> > > > > I like Ralf's email, and most of all I agree that the
> > > > > existing
> > > > > wording is clearer.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My view on the NEP is that it does not mandate dropping
> > > > > support, but
> > > > > encourage it. In my projects I would drop it if I had use for
> > > > > Python
> > > > > 3.7+ features. It so happens that we want to use PEP-593 so
> > > > > we were
> > > > > grateful for NEP-29 giving us "permission" to drop 3.6.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I would suggest that 3.6 be dropped immediately if there are
> > > > > any open
> > > > > PRs that would benefit from it, or code cleanups that it
> > > > > would
> > > > > enable. The point of the NEP is to short-circuit discussion
> > > > > about
> > > > > whether it's "worth" dropping 3.6. If it's valuable at all,
> > > > > do it.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Probably the only thing that requires 3.7 in NumPy at this time
> > > > is the
> > > > module level `__getattr__`, which is used only for deprecations
> > > > (and to
> > > > make the financial removal slightly more gentle).
> > > > I am not sure if PyPy already has stable support for 3.7 yet?
> > > > Although
> > > > PyPy is maybe not a big priority.
> > > > 
> > > > We don't have to support 3.6 and I don't care if we do. Until
> > > > this
> > > > discussion my assumption was we would probably drop it.
> > > > 
> > > > But, current master is tested against 3.6, so the main work
> > > > seems
> > > > release related. If Chuck thinks that is no hassle I don't mind
> > > > if
> > > > NumPy is a bit more conservative than NEP 29.
> > > > 
> > > > Or is there a danger of setting a precedent where projects are
> > > > wrongly
> > > > expected to keep support just because NumPy still has it, so
> > > > that NumPy
> > > > not being conservative actually helps everyone?
> > > > 
> > > > - Sebastian
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Thanks all,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Juan.
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Mon, 2 Nov 2020, at 2:01 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 7:47 AM Stephan Hoyer <
> > > > > > shoyer at gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2020 at 7:47 PM Stefan van der Walt <
> > > > > > > stefanv at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2020, at 18:54, Jarrod Millman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I also misunderstood the purpose of the NEP.  I
> > > > > > > > > assumed it
> > > > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > intended to encourage projects to drop old versions
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > Python.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It was. It is. I think the NEP is very clear on that.
> > > > > > Honestly we
> > > > > > should just follow the NEP and drop 3.6 now for both NumPy
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > SciPy, I just am tired of arguing for it - which the NEP
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > have prevented being necessary, and I don't want to do
> > > > > > again right
> > > > > > now, so this will probably be my last email on this thread.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Other
> > > > > > > > > people have viewed the NEP similarly:
> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/networkx/networkx/issues/4027
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Of all the packages, it makes sense for NumPy to behave
> > > > > > > > most
> > > > > > > > conservatively with depreciations. The NEP suggests
> > > > > > > > allowable
> > > > > > > > support periods, but as far as I recall does not
> > > > > > > > enforce
> > > > > > > > minimal support.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It doesn't *enforce* it, but the recommendation is very
> > > > > > clear. It
> > > > > > would be good to follow it.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Stephan Hoyer had a good recommendation on how we can
> > > > > > > > clarify
> > > > > > > > the NEP to be easier to intuit. Stephan, shall we make
> > > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > ammendment to the NEP with your idea?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > For reference, here was my proposed revision:
> > > > > > > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/14086#issuecomment-649287648
> > > > > > > Specifically, rather than saying "the latest release of
> > > > > > > NumPy
> > > > > > > supports all versions of Python released in the 42 months
> > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > NumPy's release", it says "NumPy will only require
> > > > > > > versions of
> > > > > > > Python that were released more than 24 months ago". In
> > > > > > > practice,
> > > > > > > this works out to the same thing (at least given Python's
> > > > > > > old 18
> > > > > > > month release cycle).
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > This changes the definition of the support window (in a
> > > > > > > way that
> > > > > > > I think is clearer and that works better for infrequent
> > > > > > > releases), but there is still the question of how large
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > window should be for NumPy.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I'm not sure it's clearer, the current NEP has a nice
> > > > > > graphic and
> > > > > > literally says "a project with a major or minor version
> > > > > > release in
> > > > > > November 2020 should support Python 3.7 and newer.").
> > > > > > However happy
> > > > > > to adopt it if it makes others happy - in the end it comes
> > > > > > down to
> > > > > > the same thing: it's recommended to drop Python 3.6 now.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > My personal opinion is that somewhere in the range of 24-
> > > > > > > 36
> > > > > > > months would be appropriate.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Ralf
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > > > > > NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> > > > > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > > > > NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> > > > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > > > NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> > > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> > > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > > NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> > > 
> > 
> > --
> > Thomas Caswell
> > tcaswell at gmail.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20201105/cd329556/attachment.sig>