On Sep 19, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: >My biggest problem with ``python3``, is what happens after 3.9.
FWIW, 3.9 by my rough calculation is 7 years away. >I know Guido doesn’t particularly like two digit version numbers and it’s >been suggested on this list that instead of 3.10 we’re likely to move >directly into 4.0 regardless of if it’s a “big” change or not. > >If that is the case, then all of the user education, ui, etc around >``python3`` would then need to be again updated to ``python4`` *OR* we’d need >a ``python3`` bin which points to ``python4``. If there’s a call to action >for at some point moving ``python`` to invoke Python 3.x at some point then >hopefully at that point Python 4.x could just be ``python``. > >All of this assuming of course that 4.0 isn’t a major break like 3.0 and that >we do 4.0 instead of 3.10 as has been suggested. I seem to recall Guido saying that *if* there's a 4.0, it won't be a major break like Python 3, whatever that says about the numbering scheme after 3.9. Is 7 years enough to eradicate Python 2 the way we did for Python 1? Then maybe Python 4 can reclaim /usr/bin/python. Cheers, -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
