python documentation

[python at blackward.eu]

Chris,

you seem to imply, that I have compiled said versions without reason and 
that the same would be possible on basis of Python 3 - which is simply 
not true. Maybe you are not enough acquainted with Qt and belonging 
libraries alike PyQtGraph. Maybe you are just not willing to see / 
accept these arguments.

By the way, some months ago I started trying to migrate to Python 3 and 
gave up in favor of creating said compilation. Compatibility of Python 
and its Packages decreased with V3 significantly. A whole lot of minor 
and major incompatibilities between your subversions and belonging 
packages. This was one reason, why Java took the route to its own death.

With a view to the mid and long term future, this discussion even gives 
me cause to ponder about whether it doesn't make more sense to rely more 
on C# and WinForms for professional projects from now on. I am fluent in 
both too and it always makes sense to bet on the right horse at an early 
stage.

But to be honest, I see no reason to discuss that further, you seem to 
be quite determined - so be it. Ignore Blythooon. I have no disadvantage 
by that, as I would not have an advantage the other way round, so I am 
fine with it.

Best Regards
Dominik






On 2021-03-27 04:44, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 2:15 PM <python at blackward.eu> wrote:
>> 
>> No, I am not encouraging, I am just offering the possibility.
>> 
>> Python and its community once was not dogmatic. At least this was my
>> impression when I started - after all Python originally had been
>> designed to be multi paradigmatic. This spirit of freedom was one 
>> mayor
>> reason for Python to grow so fast - from my POV.
>> 
>> But freedom is constituted by freedom of choice.
>> 
>> It might be a good thing to recommend people to switch to Python 3.*, 
>> it
>> might be a bad idea to FORCE people to do so by taking away the
>> possibility to install Python 2.7.*; some people tend to react badly
>> when infantilised.
> 
> Why do you install 2.7.18? Isn't it a bad idea to FORCE people onto
> that particular version, instead of letting them run 2.7.9 or 2.7.1 if
> they choose? Does it infringe on their freedoms by offering only one
> version?
> 
> If people want a specific version, they can get it. There's no reason
> to promote the use of outdated versions.
> 
>> If I am right, the Python 2.7.* installers still are provided on the
>> python.org website. So long as this is done, I cannot see a reason not
>> to list a 'distribution' using Python 2.7.* in said list, right?
> 
> You have a pre-1.0 distribution of an end-of-life version of Python
> that works on a very specific platform. That's fine. But there's no
> reason to have it promoted anywhere.
> 
>> By the way, there is more, Blythooon offers beyond what I already have
>> written in the last email. Otherwise please name me another comparable
>> MINIMAL 'distribution', which is compiled specifically for scientific
>> FRONTend development? In terms of diversity I also cannot see, why
>> Blythooon MUST have something special to be listed? Is it not enough,
>> that it is another one?
>> 
> 
> Nope, not enough for it to be promoted. The page you linked to
> originally is a very short list of only those which are notable enough
> to be worth promoting. And from what I'm seeing, yours isn't.
> 
> Move to Python 3 and leave the old version behind. It has been a year
> since Python 2 received any updates at all, and over a decade since
> 2.7 was originally released. Isn't it time it was finally permitted to
> rest in peace?
> 
> ChrisA