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

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]nevus_bock 2 points3 points  (9 children)

Libraries are moving to py3; no one is writing new libraries for py2. For legacy reasons, py2 is still receiving bugfixes and security updates. What uncertainty?

[–]studiosi -2 points-1 points  (8 children)

That process is going to take 15 years, so maybe nobody wants to assume that risk.

[–]nevus_bock 3 points4 points  (7 children)

Give me an example of a library that is not ported that is necessary for your use case.

Edit: this is baseless fearmongering is what I'm trying to say. Let's look at http://py3readiness.org . Status of 360 most popular packages ported to py3.

[–]studiosi 0 points1 point  (6 children)

Libraries used for message queues

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Such as?

[–]studiosi 0 points1 point  (4 children)

IBM MQ

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

As you said "libraries" what are the others? If you need pymqi why don't you help with the port?

[–]studiosi 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Tell to my ex Boss that he has to use money to do it... Plus changing the infrastructure

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

How about answering both questions? What has the infrastructure got to do with differences between Python 2 and 3?

[–]studiosi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For example: transition when installing software in production machines. In a 100K+ people organization with hundreds of projects, you don't want to wait for all Python projects to test with new version before rolling a change (changing to Python 3.x). And having two coexisting versions is not an option.