On 27 April 2018 at 03:18, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > On Apr 26, 2018, at 09:28, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> In pondering our approach to future Python major releases, I found >>> myself considering the experience we've had with Python 3. The whole >>> Py3k effort predates my involvement in the community so I missed a >>> bunch of context about the motivations, decisions, and challenges. >>> While I've pieced some of that together over the years now since I've >>> been around, I've certainly seen much of the aftermath. For me, at >>> least, it would be helpful to have a bit more insight into the >>> history. :) > > It would certainly be an interesting document, but I suspect you’ll get a bit > of the old “ask 3 lawyers and get 5 opinions” kind of response. ;)
http://python-notes.curiousefficiency.org/en/latest/python3/questions_and_answers.html covers some of the questions Eric is asking (mostly from my PoV, but Guido corrected my answer to the initial "Why was Python 3 made incompatible with Python 2?" question shortly after I posted the first version of it). https://www.curiousefficiency.org/posts/2014/08/python-4000.html is a more retrospective-y article that looks more at the implications for Python 4. For the "What actually happened?" info, probably the 3 main documents to look at would be PEP 3000 (the process doc), PEP 3100 (accepted changes that didn't get their own PEPs), and PEP 3099 (explicitly rejected ideas that also didn't get their own PEPs). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
