> > For example, I need web2py to provide python 2.6 compatibility for at > least another 5 years. I'm going to need python 2.7 compatibility for at > least another 10 years if not longer.
I don't know if your particular application(s) make use of many other Python libraries, but if they do, then you also need those libraries to maintain Python 2 compatibility for the next 10 years (or you have to fork and maintain them yourself, which may work for you). Of course this will vary by application, but in many cases, there will come a point at which it will be easier to port the app code to Python 3 than to try to keep hanging on to Python 2. Also, breaking backward compatibility by merely switching to Python 3 isn't the same as breaking backward compatibility by changing the web2py API. There are tools to automate the process of converting application code from Python 2 to 3 that will get you most of the way. Most of the web2py-specific code would presumably remain unchanged. Anyway, I agree that the ideal would be a web3py that works with both 2.7 and 3.x and that runs legacy web2py apps as well. Anthony -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
