> > I also thought about building both py2+3 at the same time, it would be a > great debugging help during the transition if you can easily run both. Then > in 3 years we'll just cut out the py2 part and be done with it... >
I am thinking of what would be the real benefits, compared with the scheme: I keep two sage git repos at sage2/ and sage3/ and build sage2/ for python2 and sage3/ for python3. I fix a problem in python3 built and commit the fix. Then I import the commit to the python2 repo and check if the commit does not break python2 built. In the proposed scheme, we would not need to move the commits around. Are there other advantages besides this? And we should consider if these benefits (not yet clear to me) outweigh the extra efforts to make sage buildable to run with both python2 and python3. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
