On Nov 3, 2009, at 1:07 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:On Nov 2, 2009, at 10:48 PM, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:A better language, i.e. Python 3.x, will become better faster withoutdragging the 2.x series out any longer.If Python 2.7 becomes the last of the 2.x series, then I personally favor back porting as many features from Python 3 as possible.And if *2.6* becomes the last of the 2.x series?
Then clearly we can't back port features.I'd like to read some case studies of people who have migrated applications from 2.6 to 3.0. Having just gone through a 2 week sprint to migrate Launchpad from 2.4 to 2.6, and only making it to 2.5, I can say that I was unpleasantly surprised at the amount of work it took. A lot of that was working out the dependency upgrades, with some amount of fixing our code (mostly tests) for things that have changed (e.g. exception print/str format). We didn't make it to Python 2.6 because dealing with deprecation warnings for sha, md5, and sets (a little in our code but tons in our dependencies) consumed most of our remaining time.
Given another week or so I think we would have made it to Python 2.6, but I'm not at all confident that that would have been a good enough platform to attempt an upgrade to Python 3, even if all of our very numerous large dependencies were available for Python 3. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad, but my recent experience informs me that I'm probably being too optimistic rather than too pessimistic.
-Barry
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
