I agree. I would suggest backporting bugfixes to 0.14 for 2 years, or not naming it LTS because 1y is not “long term” by most definitions.
imho we should aim for 1.0 for this time next year and maybe *that* can depend on Python >= 3.6. =) Juan. On 11 Nov 2017, 6:52 PM +1100, imag...@sina.com, wrote: > Just my own opinion. we can give up python2.x -- YXDragon > ----- 原始邮件 ----- > 发件人：Stefan van der Walt <stef...@berkeley.edu> > 收件人：scikit-image@python.org > 主题：[scikit-image] Python 3 transition > 日期：2017年11月11日 14点34分 > > Hi, everyone > I'd like to make a 4th attempt to determine our transition pathway to > Python 3. The last thread is here: > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-image/2017-July/005304.html > I would like to propose that the next version, 0.14 (scheduled for March > of next year), becomes the last targeted for Python 2. It will also be > an LTS (Long Time Support), which means we will backport serious fixes > for a period of one year. 0.15 will then target Python >= 3.5 only > (sorry, no f-strings yet!). > Let me know your thoughts. > Stéfan > _______________________________________________ > scikit-image mailing list > scikit-image@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image > _______________________________________________ > scikit-image mailing list > scikit-image@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image
_______________________________________________ scikit-image mailing list scikit-image@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image
