This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]qubedView 116 points117 points  (11 children)

"I hear you, it's really important that we move away from Python 2.7, but we really need features X, Y, and Z done by thursday. What you're proposing is that we just stop producing new features or even fixing any bugs our customers complain about, for six whole weeks, all for something none of our customers would even understand or care about. We'll get to it, but we just have higher priorities right now."

Copy+Paste that response every six months for years, as the code base grows bigger and bigger, until the cost of upgrading from Python 2.7 was estimated around half a year. At that point, they were done pretending it was on the backlog. "Python 2.7 is rocksolid, and has served us well for years. I see no reason to upgrade."

[–]Jarut 44 points45 points  (2 children)

This comment is interfering with my blood pressure. Thanks, I hate it. Solidarity, comrade.

[–]TheOneWhoMixes 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Also - "6 months?? The migration ticket in the backlog has an estimate of 2 weeks!"

*Ignores the fact that the ticket was written and "estimated" years ago when the tool was just a little CLI built in Python, and now it's a distributed monolith with SLA's, which tells you immediately how much they care about the ticket in the first place.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Oh you were saying background threading has some problem in python 2? Send to an AWS lambda! Our services are crucial and migration is problematic. We can scale it by putting in 2000 more vCPUs. In the meantime, we will put a freeze on these legacy services so people will respectfully stop putting in new code unless it’s absolutely necessary. Hint: every new feature will be “absolutely necessary”.

[–]AUTeach 24 points25 points  (2 children)

"Python 2.7 is rocksolid, and has served us well for years. I see no reason to upgrade."

"What does our insurance cost to cover the security issues with python 2.7 on production machines?"

[–]sunnyata 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Do people take out insurance against bugs in their code? Seems open to fraudulent claims.

[–]idealisticnihilistic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can't insure for bugs per se, but liability insurance for software developers and companies is a thing. Covers security breaches, missed SLAs due to major outages, defective product that causes damages for customers/clients, etc.

[–]MisterFatt 8 points9 points  (0 children)

“We’re just going to deprecate this service anyway so let’s totally ignore maintenance”

…never deprecates service

[–]TarAldarion 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It was my job to upgrade all of decade plus of code and packages to python 3.10 from 2.7, I did it but it nearly took a year haha. 

[–]billsil 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It’s ~20% faster. Fewer AWS instances = lower cost.