<br>Free software is an evolutionary process. Evolution dictates that those who cannot adapt will die when faced with a changing environment. It's better for us all that they do.<br><br>Thus, I am not attempting to persuade anyone to upgrade their package, rather, I'm explaining why it's best we ignore them and get on with doing productive work.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Mike Klaas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mike.klaas@gmail.com">mike.klaas@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>Be that as it may, the only way python 3 will be widely adopted if people have motivation to (need to be compatible with other libs, pressure from users, their own interest in fostering python 3.0, etc.). Â Deriding them as "lazy" accomplishes nothing and obscures the fact that it is the python maintainers responsibility to bring about this motivation if they want python 3.0 to be adopted. Â No-one is going to convert to python 3.0 because you called them lazy.</div>
<div><br></div><div>-Mike </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> </blockquote></div>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4