Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 31 Preparing To Start Removing Packages Depending Upon Python 2

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by DanL View Post
    Considering that thousands of programs/programmers used it, I'm guessing they didn't consider it trash.
    They didn't consider it trash, because they were trash. Instead of educating themselves, they preferred to stick to their kind, the trash bin. Hopeless.

    Originally posted by DanL View Post
    Or wait, let me guess - you're an uber-elite programmer that writes everything in assembly and everyone should be just like you?
    Assembler is not portable unfortunately, but having knowledge of it (generic and x86) must be an absolute top requirement to even be called a software developer.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by reavertm View Post
      Hopefully they drop only dependency tree leafs that require Python 2, not Python modules in that version as I occasionally need those to test building some corpo stuff (that uses Python 2.7) and wouldn't like to setup virtualenv just for that (or I guess having it in some separate repo would be enough).
      Python 2 as a whole reaches End Of Life in 2020, Python3 was first released in 2008 according to a comment here.

      If you cannot manage to port your stuff from Python2 to 3 in the 12 years between Python3's introduction and Python2's EOL, you're probably not as qualified at your job as you think…

      Originally posted by stormcrow View Post
      There's also Calibre (ebook reader) that's written entirely in Python 2. There's a great deal of Python 2 code out there that was left behind when the Python group decided to break compatibility in the 2 -> 3 transition. I'd say a great deal of it is never going to be ported. I'm expecting a hard fork of Python 2 when Python.org EOLs their tree. There's just too much vested interest and work in old code bases.
      In https://github.com/kovidgoyal/calibr...ment-417982690 the Calibre author claims to just fork and support Python2 by himself and for proof the points to https://github.com/kovidgoyal/cpython/commits/2.7 which did not have a single commit in the two years between February 2017 and January 2019.

      Upstreams have had 11 of 12 years from Python 3.0 until today. How can you seriously expect those people to do a credible Python2 fork if they were too lazy for over a decade.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

        There's also Calibre (ebook reader) that's written entirely in Python 2. There's a great deal of Python 2 code out there that was left behind when the Python group decided to break compatibility in the 2 -> 3 transition.
        Calibre is working on it, quite a few python3/py3 in the recent commit messages: https://github.com/kovidgoyal/calibre/commits/master

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
          If you cannot manage to port your stuff from Python2 to 3 in the 12 years between Python3's introduction and Python2's EOL, you're probably not as qualified at your job as you think…
          Maybe his job is not to waste time porting, ever thought about it?

          Keep thinking everyone works on one single project their entire life and obviously they're going to port it because they clearly have nothing else to spend their time on. Holy smokes.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by DanL View Post

            What's the big hurry? Considering that Python2 is supported upstream until 2020, it doesn't need to be a release blocking bug/transition at this point. They are trying to make the transition as painless as possible.

            Or maybe you're the kind of person that has an abscessed tooth and reaches for the pliers?
            whats my teeth gotta do with this thread? if your trying to be funny go to gofundme an get yaself into comedy school or better yet Dress up as Trump so we can all laugh at you

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Weasel View Post
              Maybe his job is not to waste time porting, ever thought about it?

              Keep thinking everyone works on one single project their entire life and obviously they're going to port it because they clearly have nothing else to spend their time on. Holy smokes.
              Depends on the project, but some authors want to retain some control over their babies throughout the years, even decades. Usually it means porting to a new platform every now and then. For example, some famous 8/16-bit software have been ported to 64-bit OSes or Web (JS/WebGL). There are even Rust ports of ancient software. Porting from Python 2 to 3 is a rather mundane task and you can automate significant part of it if the library is rather small. If your original goal was to make a usable library and you still want to use it (even yourself), you'll have to keep up with the changes in the language.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                Did a quick check with the AUR and Arch's Packages and MPV is Python 3 now, Handbrake and Firefox only have compile-time dependencies (with Python 3 compat work underway), Chromium is only compile-time only as well (didn't check for any compat commits), Kdenlive, Digikam, & Gimp have no Python dependencies according to their Arch package information, Inkscape only has optional dependencies on some Py2 packages so it'll only lack a few features until compat work is done. Not saying any of those don't depend on something that depends on Python 2, but only one of the programs you listed actually depends on Python 2 during runtime...I didn't check Spotify or Arduino...
                Ok, I'm not that familiar with Arch at the moment. Still, I wanted to check the current state in a chroot and listed some pkg dependencies with pactree (from pacman-contrib). I saw thatAnyway, the situation doesn't look as bad as I thought.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                  Python 2 as a whole reaches End Of Life in 2020, Python3 was first released in 2008 according to a comment here.

                  If you cannot manage to port your stuff from Python2 to 3 in the 12 years between Python3's introduction and Python2's EOL, you're probably not as qualified at your job as you think…
                  "My" stuff is ported and works with 2 and 3 but I cannot drop 2 because someone somewhere uses 2 only, so I need to build and test 2 flavour. I think you haven't worked in corporation before so you don't realise there are environments where not everything depends solely on qualifications of yours. It's ok, you can be Awoseme elsewhere

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                    To force projects to either update or be left behind. When the major distributions ship both versions, there isn't that much incentive to update a project from 2 to 3.
                    Is this really how you feel about Free Software distribution, that the powerful should enforce compliance by banning all software that does not immediately obey the masters and for no other reason? In my opinion, distributors should keep distributing software like Python 2 until it is no longer actively maintained, because Free Software distributors distribute Free Software. It'a sort of what they do.

                    It seems to me that a lot of people these days think that the Free Software community is a corporation, that can be forced to react if people go on strike or something like that. It's not how it works.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by jo-erlend View Post

                      Is this really how you feel about Free Software distribution, that the powerful should enforce compliance by banning all software that does not immediately obey the masters and for no other reason? In my opinion, distributors should keep distributing software like Python 2 until it is no longer actively maintained, because Free Software distributors distribute Free Software. It'a sort of what they do.

                      It seems to me that a lot of people these days think that the Free Software community is a corporation, that can be forced to react if people go on strike or something like that. It's not how it works.
                      In regards to software using unsupported/end-of-life languages, absolutely. Why should Ubuntu, Fedora, Arch, Gentoo, or anyone else have to maintain Python2 and packages that depend on Python2 when it hits EOL and possibly becomes unsupported? I say possibly because with the Free Software Community there's a really good chance someone will at least pick up Python2 enough to give it security and bug fixes.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X