121–130 of 413 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should I maintain code, servers and libs in 2 versions of a backend programming language?
Because one is essentially EOL?
And the latter doesn't work so well thus far for Python 3.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This sounds like a fork. Python 3 is already a fork.
Pretty much the only people that are working towards splitting the community are people like you, who spread FUD and sprinkle snide, bitter and wrong remarks across threads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> instead of rethinking/refactoring. And breaking backwards compatibility Django is not RoR. Their users rely on being able to upgrade seamlessly. The overall Api makes sense, there are some rough corners (yes Sites, I'm talking about you) the docs are ok once you get the hang of them
When you say "Django is not RoR", are you saying Django doesn't break backwards compatibility but Ruby on Rails does? If so, I have to very strongly disagree. It's almost mind boggling to me how much they break backwards compatibility as a framework. They usually warn users with a deprecation warning in one version and then they make the backwards incompatible change in the next version, but the sheer amount of these…
Oh my god stop. You're all over this thread. What bit you ? This is the price you pay for staying on an old version . You do not get to stick to an old version AND demand that others do too. You CAN stay on Python 2. You CAN stay on Django 1.11. It's LTS. So is Python 2.7. You get to use both until 2020 with no issues. After that, not upgrading is a technical debt that will start to accrue, faster and faster as you c…
> Oh my god stop. You're all over this thread. What bit you? As someone who has 6 comments in this thread yourself, I don't think you are in position to complaint. I also find "what bit you" and "please stop" rude. You don't get to dictate what others opinion should be. > This is the price you pay for staying on an old version. You do not get to stick to an old version AND demand that others do too. 7+ years on and t…
This isn't a numbers contest. Unlike yours, none of my comments are shitting on the efforts of volunteers that are doing their best to keep people like you happy and making money using a project you're not paying for.
> So maybe you want to recheck with reality whether the transition was a success instead of arguing with me?
You completely missed the point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's going to be more and more of a burden for the developers to maintain compatibility with a 7-year old version of Python. That's the version of Python that most of their users actually use -- with no major plans of mass updating.
Yeah no. I know that there are domains that are mostly on Python 2, and of course you'll always have legacy / unmaintained things lying around. But "zeee majoritie is Python 2.7!!1111" does not become true by some people chanting it over and over again. The simple fact that frameworks and libraries are moving away from Python 2 already proves that the majority does, in fact, not use Python 2. Otherwise maintainers wo…
Maybe check your language a little? "zee majoritie", "chanting it over and over" etc, gets tired and offensive soon.
That aside, there are actual numbers for Pypi supporting that. What do you have to counter these?
>The simple fact that frameworks and libraries are moving away from Python 2 already proves that the majority does, in fact, not use Python 2.
It just proves that after 7+ years, some frameworks and libs managed to justify porting over to 3 too. It doesn't say much about which is used more.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly, I have the exact opposite view on Django. I hate their API and overall architecture, which I find to be the result of glueing features on top of features for many years. The internal code also is just like that: looks like every single method is riddled with out-of-band conditionals, which is the result of a community that prefers to hack things to work, instead of rethinking/refactoring.
I'd prefer to hold judgement on the internals of Django, however as a developer using the API, I also think it's a pleasure to use. There is a very high level of consistency, similar patterns used throughout, and the architecture results in a project structure that I can explain to a new developer who has never used Django before in minutes. I find few frameworks really scale in terms of structure and consistency, an…
Good. I've been getting into python a bit because i have an interest in datascience. I'm mostly a Java dev. I have to say the python2/3 divide is a real turn off. Many of the science libs want to use seem to be in 2.7 with no signs of moving.
> Many of the science libs want to use seem to be in 2.7 with no signs of moving The most important scientific libraries have pledged to drop support before 2020, and are all python3-ready http://www.python3statement.org/
I used to work on a GUI app in Python. I ported it to Python 3, then switched OSes for various reasons. 5 years on, on Ubuntu Xenial (so new I can't even use it in Travis, but that's a separate whine), I install pykdeuic4 and it's using Python 2. So I've basically abandoned that project for 5 years now, because every time I looked at it I thought "surely Python 3 will be here in a few months, I don't want to port backwards to Python 2".
(Serious question: is there a PPA or anything I can use to get these things for Python 3? I need PyQwt as well as PyKDE)
The next release, Django 1.11, will be a long-term support release, and the one after that, Django 2.0, will no longer support Python 2. https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2015/jun/25/roadmap/ I've grow to highly respect the Django project for its good documentation, its healthy consideration for backwards compatibility, security, steady improvements and all round goodness.
> its healthy consideration for backwards compatibility Like screwing the huge majority of users with Python 2.x Django projects and having them update or be left behind?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Python 3 is already a fork. The problem is that Python 2 cannot evolve freely alongside Python 3, because even if someone wants to maintain it and keep releasing versions, the Python Software Foundation won't let them use the name Python (there was a post some weeks ago about someone who actually tried). So there is no free competition between 2 and 3. 2 has been basically killed by a decision from above. Don't get m…
> the Python Software Foundation won't let them use the name Python That's how trademarks are supposed to work; they must go after anyone using without permission or they lose it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty much the only people that are working towards splitting the community are people like you, who spread FUD and sprinkle snide, bitter and wrong remarks across threads.
Notice how I made a pragmatic observation (that it's already a fork), which one might agree or disagree with, and you went for name-calling about FUD, snide, bitter, "people like you", etc.