Paul Ganssle <p.gans...@gmail.com> added the comment:

> So is the proposed change, in a way. At some point, there will be a 4.0 
> release, which may or may not break the code in question.

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that there will be a 4.0 release. It 
could be that we decide that a 4.0 release would be reserved for a very 
specific kind of major compatibility breakage and that we were never going to 
do that kind of breakage again.

In any case, I think one part of what Serhiy was trying to say is that we can't 
just avoid this problem by releasing 4.0 instead of 3.10, because switching to 
4.0 brings its own (not inconsiderable) host of problems. Presumably the 
symlink would be `python4` instead of `python3`, so a bunch of shebangs, 
documentation and guides would need to be updated.

Basically, unless something changes, a bunch of stuff is going to break in the 
release after 3.9 no matter what we do. It's probably a good idea to try to 
mitigate the problems of *both* versioning approaches, to give us maximum 
freedom in our choice of versioning scheme int he future.

----------
nosy: +p-ganssle

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37636>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to