Hi Reinoud. I started the thread since I am concerned there could be a
real threat to zope that I work with. I have not seen anything on the
python list in general but I was happy to see the blog article from
Twisted to get some perspective from Glyph. Without an effort to assess
and plan with the folks who's libraries we depend upon (and those that
depend on zope) there could be harsh implications.
I have no doubt the proposed language changes will be good for the
maturation of python, but no backwards compatibility means we are
building obsolescence with each line of code we write. The threat to
substantial and established projects like Zope and Twisted is fracturing
the community, forking the projects, and creating a marketing
environment for python 2 technology that could make it a difficult sell.
Python 2 to P3K will require substantial rewriting from what we are
seeing and I think we all agree we cannot put much stock in conversion
scripts for complex code with subtle language changes. The fact that
that Jean-Paul Calderone is involved with this is at least a bit more
comforting understanding his ties to Twisted.
I was hoping Jim might respond to this thread since I am certain there
is concern about what this means for the future of Zope. I am hoping
that core communities of python framework developers may come together
on what is in their best interests.
Communication with the core python team on impacts could create a
cohesive strategy for the future and improve buy-in if there can be
agreement on how to move forward. It may be difficult to get more
unified support from the light framework project leadership since
porting these frameworks will take less time. In any case, I believe
this dialog likely needs to come sooner rather than later, particularly
from the leadership of the framework projects. I am not sure if some of
this at least occurring informally, but I get a sense that formal
discussion with the python team is needed soon and well before P3K is
ready. It would at least provide some sense of how we will be navigating
inevitable changes to the language (and to determine impacts on the zope
framework and our own development decisions). With a plan and some
consideration by the python team, the objectives of P3K may not seem so bad.
Reinoud van Leeuwen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 10:29:58AM +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Paul Winkler wrote:
He must've changed his tune then. I heard him discuss Python 2.6 and
maybe Python 2.7, but definitely wanted to avoid anything following this.
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 05:39:45PM +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Has there been a strong statement that there won't be a Python 2.7 and
beyond? Will Python 2.x be actively killed off?
Quite the opposite, Guido proposed last year to do 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9.
After that it's not clear to me.
Do similar discussions like this one exist in the other Python framework
communities? I think we are all having the same problem.
Zope3-dev mailing list