On Sat, Mar 22, 2014, at 15:40, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Am 22.03.14 23:33, schrieb Nick Coghlan: > > Hard to maintain legacy software is a fact of life, and way too much > > of it is exposed to the public internet. This PEP is about doing what > > we can to mitigate the damage caused both by other people's mistakes, > > and also the inherent challenges of migrating from the error prone > > POSIX text model to something more reasonable. > > > > I *don't* think its reasonable to expect us to do this without support > > from the corporate users that caused the problem in the first place > > (by continuing to deploy older versions of Python without investing > > adequately in their upkeep), so I'd encourage everyone employed by a > > commercial user of Python to remind their management chains of the > > risks of failing to invest development time in any upstream > > dependencies that they expect to keep pace with the dynamic nature of > > the internet. > > I hope indeed you are successful in activating resources. However, > putting them on this backporting project seems like a waste. They > should rather go into porting stuff to 3.x where people need it. > > As responsible maintainers, we should just advise our users that > Python 2.7 is a dead horse, and that they should stop riding it. > More professionally, we should set an official end-of-life date > for 2.7 (alas, we should have done that two years ago). > > I hope that the language summit can agree to stopping bug fix > releases for 2.7 in 2014.
As (I believe) previously discussed and documented in PEP 373, this date currently will be May 2015. _______________________________________________ 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
