> On Nov 4, 2017, at 4:46 AM, Philipp A. <flying-sh...@web.de> wrote: > > Entirely new bindings lead to new applications being written using those > bindings. Writing applications in Python 2 is an immediate maintenance burden > and people only do it because of stubborn ideology or a complete lack of > awareness that Python 2 is being killed off for good. I think this is a remarkably short sighted statement. It assumes that people that would use these bindings have no existing Python codebase at all, and can afford to start a brand new project. The reality is much different.
Let's take a specific example. I have 6 years experience writing Python for the visual effects industry. We have a 10 year old Python 2 codebase. We also use an application from Autodesk called Maya. It has been a Qt 4 application with Python 2 embedded since 2012. In 2016 they jumped to qt 5 and pyside2. Now Autodesk knows that companies have built large codebase around their product that requires Python 2. What would've happened if pyside2 did not support Python 2.7? They'd be stuck either forcing all their customers to move to Python 3 and risk people not wanting the new version of the software, or they'd be prevented from moving to Qt 5. So no, Python 2 is not dead. Not by a long shot. -Chris
