Python 3.0 unfit for serious work?

[Jeff Templon]

yo,

Bjorn, I am not sure I see why my post is bull crap.  I think all you
are doing is agreeing with me.  My post was entitled "Python 3.0 unfit
for serious work", you just indicated that the Linux distros will
agree with me, in order to be taken seriously, the distros will have
to include 2.x python for a very long time.  If 3.0 and 2.x have any
serious degree of incompatibility, python will be a favorite subject
for religious rants and heated arguments for many people.  And if we
don't manage to restrain our developers from using features that force
us prematurely to move to 3.0 ... and don't underestimate what this
means, because this means other things will have to move as well,
which may have dependencies on yet other things like C++ library
versions ... then I would have to, for reasons of maintainability,
argue against continuing to allow python code development in the
project.  I love python, but not enough to make 20+ people's lives
difficult.

There are already people making this sort of argument in our project.

                       JT

On 2/20/07, BJörn Lindqvist <bjourne at gmail.com> wrote:
> What a load of bull crap. Python is one of the simplest packages to
> have multiple version of installed. When Python 3.0 is released, all
> Linux distros will acquire a symlink at /usr/bin/python2 pointing to
> the latest Python 2.x version installed. Or something equivalent.
> Rest assured that Linux distributors will not drop Python 2.x support
> in the nearest decade. They are not stupid.