> My opinion is that the process is correct and it is just a question of > whether the timelines are generous enough or not. Somewhere between > "Python 2.6" and "never" there must be a point where people have had > enough time to change over their code after getting nagged by the > DeprecationWarning. I couldn't agree with you more, Paul. I think that point is whenever the major version number is bumped to 3. > Most people in the Python community know that Python doesn't really have > "minor releases" other than bugfix releases. This is python-dev thinking again. There are lots of users of Python who don't want to be "in the Python community", and feel that a properly managed programming language is one that doesn't require "membership" to get things right. Bill
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