After thinking about it for a bit, I am not sure whether a poll would be actionable. For example, if 1000 users provide a positive response and 5 users provide a negative response, how do we interpret that and where do we draw a line? How about instead we encourage users to reach out, and tell what is not working for them? For example:
Beam is considering making 2.23.0 a final release supporting Py2. If you are not able to switch to Python 3, please let us know why: [short link to user@ thread] [1]. Thoughts? [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0de71d98d98b213dd1d0c45c1f5642135116f25def5637a5f41c8d29%40%3Cuser.beam.apache.org%3E On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:50 AM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:38 AM Valentyn Tymofieiev <valen...@google.com> > wrote: > >> I have reached out to user@ for feedback on Python 3 migration[1]. >> > > Maybe also ask on slack? There are quite a bit of users there as well. > > >> >> Could somebody from PMC please help with Twitter poll? >> > > I can try to do this. What question would you like to ask? I do not know > much about twitter polls but I assume they have character limits similar to > regular tweets. > > >> >> Technically, we can proceed with the change between 2.23.0 and 2.24.0, so >> that's after 2.23.0 is cut and we give sufficient time for users to >> respond. >> >> [1] >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0de71d98d98b213dd1d0c45c1f5642135116f25def5637a5f41c8d29%40%3Cuser.beam.apache.org%3E >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:22 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Yes we need to poll this outside as Robert proposed. >>> >>> The proposed last support version corresponds with the next release that >>> will be >>> cut in two weeks. Sounds a bit short if we count the time to poll people >>> on this >>> subject but still could be. >> >> Technically, we can proceed with the change between 2.23.0 and 2.24.0, so >> that's after 2.23.0 is cut and we give sufficient time for users to >> respond. >> >> >>> I remember Chad mentioned in this thread the impossibility to get >>> support for >>> python 2 in his industry until the end of the year, Maybe things have >>> improved. >>> Have they? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 6:10 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > I like that option as a concrete proposal. I think we should circulate >>> it more widely (the users list, twitter poll, at least a new thread...), >>> maybe phrasing it as "is there any reason you couldn't migrate to Python 3 >>> (or stick with an older version of Beam) after 2.23 (due to be cut here in >>> a couple of weeks)?" If there is strong concern/pushback, we could consider >>> holding on for one more release. >>> > >>> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 8:54 AM David Cavazos <dcava...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> +1 >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 6:52 PM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 4:27 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> As a concrete proposal, could we commit to removing python 2 >>> support by 2.24? In other words, mark the next release 2.23 as the last >>> python 2 compatible Beam version. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:09 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev < >>> valen...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Another input here: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> If you opened a Python PR in the last few days, you probably >>> noticed that our test suites were broken by a transitive dependency of Beam >>> that dropped python 2 support, but did not declare python_requires>=3 in >>> its setup.py [1]. This temporarily broke a subset of Beam Py2 users (who >>> did not explicitly pin the 'rsa' dependency), and still affects Beam >>> development[2]. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> This is the second time[3] Beam is affected with an issue of this >>> kind, so support of Python 2 starts to slow down our development, and add >>> toil for maintainers of packages we depend on (both directly and >>> transitively). >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> [1] https://github.com/sybrenstuvel/python-rsa/issues/152 >>> >>>>> [2] >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9993b40b0c1cb8682ce56013165d4b80fdde0ee469a73bcb9466ddfb%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>> >>>>> [3] https://github.com/hamcrest/PyHamcrest/issues/131 >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:06 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Thank you for re-opening this Valentyn. I am in favor of EOLing >>> py2 support sooner than later. The reality is that we will not be >>> effectively supporting beam python 2 for a long time while the ecosystem >>> already EOLed python 2. That said, a significant chunk (but no longer a >>> majority) of our users are still using python 2. Upgrades are painful, it >>> might be especially painful nowadays. It would be good to hear counter view >>> points, user voices related to this. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 4:53 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev < >>> valen...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Back at the end of February we decided to revisit this >>> conversation in 3 months. Do folks on this thread have any new input or >>> perspective regarding us balancing "user pain/contributor pain/our ability >>> to continuously test with python 2 in a shifting environment"? >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Some new information on my end is that we have been seeing >>> steady adoption of Python 3 among Beam Python users in Dataflow, >>> particularly strong adoption among streaming users, and Dataflow is >>> sunsetting Python 2 support for all released Beam SDKs later this year [1]. >>> We will have to remove Python 2 Beam test suites that use Dataflow when >>> Dataflow runner disables Py2 support if this happens before Beam Py2 EOL >>> (when we have to remove all Py2 suites), including performance tests that >>> still use Dataflow on Python 3. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> I am curious how much motivation there is in the community at >>> this moment to continue Py2 support in Beam, whether any previous Py3 >>> migration blockers were resolved or any new blockers discovered among Beam >>> users. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> [1] >>> https://cloud.google.com/python/docs/python2-sunset/#dataflow >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 3:52 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev < >>> valen...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> That's good news! Thanks for sharing. >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> Another datapoint, here are a few of Beam's dependencies that >>> no longer release new py2 artifacts (I looked at REQUIRED_PACKAGES + aws, >>> gcp, and interactive extras): >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> hdfs >>> >>>>>>>> numpy >>> >>>>>>>> pyarrow >>> >>>>>>>> ipython >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> There are more if we include transitive dependencies and >>> test-only packages. I also remember encountering one issue last month that >>> was broken only on Py2, which we had to go back and fix. >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> If others have noticed frictions related to ongoing Py2 support >>> or have updates on previously mentioned Py3 migration blockers, feel free >>> to post them. >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:19 AM Robert Bradshaw < >>> rober...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> It hasn't been 3 months yet, but I wanted to call out a >>> milestone that >>> >>>>>>>>> Python 3 downloads crossed the 50% threshold on pypi, if just >>> briefly. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:40 AM Ismaël Mejía < >>> ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> > > I would suggest re-evaluating this within the next 3 >>> months again. We need to balance between user pain/contributor pain/our >>> ability to continuously test with python 2 in a shifting environment. >>> >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> > Good idea for the in 3 months evaluation, at that point also >>> distributions will probably be phasing out python2 by default which >>> definitely help in this direction. >>> >>>>>>>>> > Thanks for updating the roadmap Ahmet >>> >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 2:49 AM Ahmet Altay < >>> al...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 1:29 AM Ismaël Mejía < >>> ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> I am with Chad on this, we should probably extend it a bit >>> more, even if it >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> makes us struggle a bit at least we have some workarounds >>> as Robert suggests, >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> and as Chad said there are still many people playing the >>> python 3 catchup game, >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> so worth to support those users. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> But maybe it is worth to evaluate the current state later >>> in the year. >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> I would suggest re-evaluating this within the next 3 months >>> again. We need to balance between user pain/contributor pain/our ability to >>> continuously test with python 2 in a shifting environment. >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> In the >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> meantime can someone please update our Roadmap in the >>> website with this info and >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> where we are with Python 3 support (it looks not up to >>> date). >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> https://beam.apache.org/roadmap/ >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> I made a minor change to update that page ( >>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10848). A more comprehensive update >>> to that page and linked ( >>> https://beam.apache.org/roadmap/python-sdk/#python-3-support) would >>> still be welcome. >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> - Ismaël >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:49 PM Robert Bradshaw < >>> rober...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 12:12 PM Chad Dombrova < >>> chad...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >> Not to mention that all the nice work for the type >>> hints will have to be redone in the for 3.x. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > Note that there's a tool for automatically converting >>> type comments to annotations: https://github.com/ilevkivskyi/com2ann >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > So don't let that part bother you. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> +1, I wouldn't worry about what can be easily automated. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > I'm curious what other features you'd like to be using >>> in the Beam source that you cannot now. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> I hit things occasionally, e.g. I just ran into wanting >>> keyword-only >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> arguments the other day. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >> It seems the faster we drop support the better. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > I've already gone over my position on this, but a >>> refresher for those who care: some of the key vendors that support my >>> industry will not offer python3-compatible versions of their software until >>> the 4th quarter of 2020. If Beam switches to python3-only before that >>> point we may be forced to stop contributing features (note: I'm the guy who >>> added the type hints :). Every month you can give us would be greatly >>> appreciated. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> As another data point, we're still 80/20 on Py2/Py3 for >>> downloads at >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> PyPi [1] (which I've heard should be taken with a grain >>> of salt, but >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> likely isn't totally off). IMHO that ratio needs to be >>> way higher for >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> Python 3 to consider dropping Python 2. It's pretty >>> noisy, but say it >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> doubles every 3 months that would put us at least >>> mid-year before we >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> hit a cross-over point. On the other hand Q4 2020 is >>> probably a >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> stretch. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> We could consider whether it needs to be an >>> all-or-nothing thing as >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> well. E.g. perhaps some features could be Python 3 only >>> sooner than >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> the whole codebase. (This would have to be well >>> justified.) Another >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> mitigation is that it is possible to mix Python 2 and >>> Python 3 in the >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> same pipeline with portability, so if there's a library >>> that you need >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> for one DoFn it doesn't mean you have to hold back your >>> whole >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> pipeline. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> - Robert >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> [1] https://pypistats.org/packages/apache-beam , and >>> that 20% may just >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> be a spike. >>> >>
