Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 413 posts

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#221

Post by StavrosK »

nodamage wrote: post #75

I have a Python 2.7 project that has been running smoothly for many years now and I'm having trouble finding a reason to upgrade to Python 3. The project uses the unicode type to represent all strings, and encodes/decodes as necessary (usually to UTF-8) when doing I/O. I haven't really had any of the Unicode handling problems that people seem to complain about in Python 2. Can someone explain what benefit I would act…

"I have a Python 2.6 project that has been running smoothly, why upgrade to 2.7?"

If you don't need any of the new features and fixes, don't, that's perfectly fine.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#223

Post by [deleted] »

Chris2048 wrote: post #219
scrollaway wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't move the goalposts? I reworded what I previously expressed. If you want to see support, you can pay people to provide that support. Free support ends in 2020. If you're not paying for it and you are making money off it, I don't see this attitude as being okay. You can ask. You can also be told no! Python 2 advocates like to bring up the PyPI download numbers as some kind of "reality". But here is the reality…

> 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 This was the line I responded to, and it has nothing to do with support, but with the ability to criticise something you aren't paying for. You introduced the idea that something was being "demanded" so that you could beat up that…

[deleted]

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#225

Post by lima »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #172
coldtea wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But "zeee majoritie is Python 2.7!!1111" does not become true by some people chanting it over and over again. 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…

> there are actual numbers for Pypi supporting that. What do you have to counter these? 99% of Pypi traffic is composed of mirrors and bots. Python 3 toolchains are more likely to use tools like devpi, wheel, and Docker to cache their packages, while Python 2 toolchains are often going to hit Pypi directly. We're concerned about which version has the majority of users, not about which has more downloads on Pypi.

Exactly. PyPi numbers are totally meaningless. It's commonly used for installing applications (that's how packages like supervisor end up in the top 20) and used in all sorts of CI scenarios.

Every OpenStack build, for example, pulls in hundreds of packages from PyPi.

In terms of real-world use, all of the Python devs I personally know moved to Python 3.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#226

Post by Chris2048 »

scrollaway wrote: post #210
Chris2048 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is "demand" in scare-quotes? I never said that, and it's a loaded term. The issue here is suggesting you shouldn't freely criticise flaws in FOSS software. This is harmful, and goes directly to affecting information people have available to them in choosing whether or not to use a piece of software in the first place. Do you actually know what money/time OP might be spending, losing, or making on Django? > FOSS g…

> Why is "demand" in scare-quotes? I never said that, and it's a loaded term. Because I was referring to coldtea's demands. > What a cop out. A lack of being paid (money at least) doesn't imply no obligations, nor freedom from criticism. Excellent, then you should be fine with me criticizing the attitude that's been displayed here. > The issue here is suggesting you shouldn't freely criticise flaws in FOSS software.…

Which comments are you interpreting as demands?

>> A lack of being paid (money at least) doesn't imply no obligations, nor freedom from criticism.

> Excellent, then you should be fine with me criticizing the attitude that's been displayed here.

Great. Do you actually have a response to this point in context, then?

> This is the same as the IE6 situation: Want support for it? Pay extra for it!

You did not argue this. You said "shit on", which doesn't translate to "demanding support". you are deflecting from the one thing I actually criticised.

Your strawman is "support is being demanded" - this isn't the case. Any further arguments on that topic are just beating the strawman.

Furthermore, oficially changing the direction of Django also may affect contributions, changes to the roadmap or architectural design for example.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#227

Post by jjuel »

coldtea wrote: post #47
yuvadam wrote: post #6

This call has been made a while back, and it makes perfect sense. Python 2 is slowly being EOL'd and if you're starting a brand new Django project there's no reason on earth you should choose Python 2 anymore. Sure legacy projects still need support and for that they get the 1.11 LTS, but otherwise it's really time to move on.

> and if you're starting a brand new Django project there's no reason on earth you should choose Python 2 anymore. How about millions of lines of code in your company in Python 2, and several Python 2 based services and websites? Why on earth will you go to Python 3 at huge rewriting costs? To get some fancy syntactic sugar and improved unicode?

Why do you have to rewrite all the code in your company if you are starting a brand new Django project? Seemingly the brand new means it is separate from currently existing projects.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#228

Post by lima »

viraptor wrote: post #209
faitswulff wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What critical packages still need to be ported to Python 3? Might be a fun project if they're open source.

Almost everything critical that's still holding out has a good reason for it. For example Twisted is being ported... slowly.

Much of Twisted already works on Python 3 even though they're not done porting yet!

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#229

Post by scrollaway »

Chris2048 wrote: post #226
scrollaway wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is "demand" in scare-quotes? I never said that, and it's a loaded term. Because I was referring to coldtea's demands. > What a cop out. A lack of being paid (money at least) doesn't imply no obligations, nor freedom from criticism. Excellent, then you should be fine with me criticizing the attitude that's been displayed here. > The issue here is suggesting you shouldn't freely criticise flaws in FOSS software.…

Which comments are you interpreting as demands? >> A lack of being paid (money at least) doesn't imply no obligations, nor freedom from criticism. > Excellent, then you should be fine with me criticizing the attitude that's been displayed here. Great. Do you actually have a response to this point in context, then? > This is the same as the IE6 situation: Want support for it? Pay extra for it! You did not argue this.…

You're appropriating criticism that was not directed to you, but to coldtea. Here and elsewhere.

Edit: Yes, appropriating. You're taking criticism I specifically directed at coldtea, applying them to your comments and then complaining it doesn't fit. I am done talking to you.

Edit 2: This was not meant to sound as aggressive as it did, sorry.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#230

Post by squeaky-clean »

faitswulff wrote: post #199
IndianAstronaut wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Python 2 is slowly being EOL'd and if you're starting a brand new Django project there's no reason on earth you should choose Python 2 anymore. Except that there are still some critical packages that aren't on Python 3 yet. Not to mention a lot of functionality breaks even if the libraries do exist, which means you have to code things up quite differently sometimes.

What critical packages still need to be ported to Python 3? Might be a fun project if they're open source.

For me, the google api client libraries, and AWS Lambda. That last one isn't totally Django related, but we use it for certain service calls, and it'd be nicer to be able to maintain one version of the language across the django app and related services.

We ended writing a service in PHP to use Google's APIs, and are mostly using Scala or JS instead of Python for the Lambda services because this project is basically a ton of unicode mangling, and you can pry Python 3's sane unicode support from my cold dead hands! But the libraries still aren't totally perfect. It just takes on dependency being out of date to screw your plans.

Post reply on HN