Kamal,
I cannot speak for the whole community but my understanding is that Python
3 is not at all backward compatible with the Python we use now. If every
Activity we have had to be rewritten in Python 3 that would be a huge
impact.
You may be familiar with my book:
With all due respect James, we need to keep moving with upstream. So
we need to look at Python 3. We also need to do it in a way that won't
break all the old activities, hence the distinction between Sugar and
the toolkit(s).
regards
-walter
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:47 AM, James Simmons
Walter,
I wasn't saying we shouldn't do it. It just sounded like it would have more
impact than anything we've attempted so far. If you could do it in such a
way that most older Activities remain functional that's great. I got the
impression you could not.
James Simmons
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014
This will have to be done so that old activities keep working, so no
worries :) Also I suspect python2 to python3 will be much easier than gtk2
to gtk3 for activity authors (and for the book).
On Friday, 21 March 2014, James Simmons nices...@gmail.com wrote:
Kamal,
I cannot speak for the
Hello all members,
I need help with the first question in You and Community section. As
I'll be working for project Port to python 3, I need three answers,
one of which will I get from the mentors and other from memberss So
the members and mentors reading this message, Please give your answer
5 matches
Mail list logo
