well, it's the same with php4 and php5. and php5 has been released in 2004 ...
Python 3 Wall of Shame
11–20 of 80 posts
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#12"Wall of Shame"? Really?
As someone who's project appears on this list (and in the WRONG color) all I can say is that I don't think anyone is trying to dis Python 3.x. Support will come when a critical mass of developers are using 3.x. I know it's kind of a chicken and egg problem but this seems to be saying that it's the package developer's fault and I don't really think that's fair or true.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#13Funny to see zope.interface on that list. I remember back in 2005, when Zope 3 had just been launched, about how everyone who mattered in the Zope world would say things like "only stupid, retrograde people won't switch to Zope3". I guess the stupid people won, because 6 years on Zope is like the Cobol of Python web frameworks. I just hope the same thing won't happen to Python itself.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#14Let's admit it. Once Django is Py3K-ready, all other projects will follow suit.
Is Django really that big a deal in the python world? I know it is a big deal in the python web world, but the web seems a pretty small part of the python world as a whole. If I where to ask all the python developers I knew to prioritize the projects they want ported to py3, I'd imagine the results being numpy/scipy/matplotlib first followed wxpython or pyqt second followed by PIL and a whole bunch a smaller librarie…
I would expect NLTK to have a fairly broad user base too, although possibly the community is less likely to be involved in the broader python landscape.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#15well, it's the same with php4 and php5. and php5 has been released in 2004 ...
Is it? I was under the impression that there's very few hosts/libraries that don't have PHP5 support now.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#16well, it's the same with php4 and php5. and php5 has been released in 2004 ...
PHP 5 was still, as much as I can remember, compatible with PHP 4, wasn't it? Anything that worked in PHP 4 worked in PHP 5.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#17"Wall of Shame"? Really? As someone who's project appears on this list (and in the WRONG color) all I can say is that I don't think anyone is trying to dis Python 3.x. Support will come when a critical mass of developers are using 3.x. I know it's kind of a chicken and egg problem but this seems to be saying that it's the package developer's fault and I don't really think that's fair or true.
I think it's not really a chicken and egg problem though.
From a user point of view, using Python 3 looks like giving up on a lot of libraries, which in turn means a lot more work to accomplish the same things. It's a big effort that does not benefit anyone. If switching to a new version of a language makes my life harder, then I will not, especially if working on a startup or a project which is time critical.
On the other hand, this is a work that the developers of the libraries will have to do anyway, sooner or later. Doing it now would benefit a lot of people that would like to use the latest version of Python and now simply cannot afford. So why do not do it? In this case the effort would benefit a lot of people at once, which is the purpose of a library in the first place.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is Django really that big a deal in the python world? I know it is a big deal in the python web world, but the web seems a pretty small part of the python world as a whole. If I where to ask all the python developers I knew to prioritize the projects they want ported to py3, I'd imagine the results being numpy/scipy/matplotlib first followed wxpython or pyqt second followed by PIL and a whole bunch a smaller librarie…
I would expect NLTK to have a fairly broad user base too, although possibly the community is less likely to be involved in the broader python landscape.
The thing with Python is it has very long tail of libraries, like NLTK, OpenCV, openopt, Mayavi etc. who's individual communities might not make up significant portion of the python community, but taken together is probably more significant than that of any single high profile project.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#19"Wall of Shame"? Really? As someone who's project appears on this list (and in the WRONG color) all I can say is that I don't think anyone is trying to dis Python 3.x. Support will come when a critical mass of developers are using 3.x. I know it's kind of a chicken and egg problem but this seems to be saying that it's the package developer's fault and I don't really think that's fair or true.
I think it's not really a chicken and egg problem though. From a user point of view, using Python 3 looks like giving up on a lot of libraries, which in turn means a lot more work to accomplish the same things. It's a big effort that does not benefit anyone. If switching to a new version of a language makes my life harder, then I will not, especially if working on a startup or a project which is time critical. On the…
"On the other hand, this is a work that the developers of the libraries will have to do anyway, sooner or later. "
But... will they "have to"? If a library author is waiting for 'critical adoption', they may never upgrade to Python 3 themselves, and have no need to upgrade the library, and the circle continues.
Re: Python 3 Wall of Shame
#20"Get the source for this GAE app at google code."
Google App Engine should be in the list as well. GAE supports Python 2.5.