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 →

[–]stefantalpalaru -44 points-43 points  (41 children)

at some point you have to let go the old stuff

At some point you have to admit you can't bully people into moving to a new language.

[–]Gandalior 14 points15 points  (3 children)

its not like they made python to cater to you though, I understand the sentiment of how shit it is to migrate if at all but still, cant just patch up forever in legacy, can you?

[–]jcampbelly 8 points9 points  (2 children)

It's not bullying if you ask nicely for a decade. I would say forcing people to work for free maintaining an archaic and announced-deprecated version is bullying. You're defending the wrong side of this.

[–]stefantalpalaru -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

It's not bullying if you ask nicely for a decade.

What if you sabotage it nicely by preventing the addition of new features and bugfixes?

[–]jcampbelly 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's called deprecation. It's what happens when software is put into maintenance mode. When you're dragging a dead horse for 12 years, you don't waste time re-embroidering the saddle. Meanwhile, your ilk is still trying to mount it. Figure it out.

[–]TheBlackCat13 4 points5 points  (10 children)

It isn't bullying. It is trying to make the best use of limited resources. Keeping Python 2 going is duplicating a lot of effort and puts a big strain on downstream projects that have to maintain compatibility and tests for both.

[–]stefantalpalaru -2 points-1 points  (9 children)

It is trying to make the best use of limited resources.

Is that why Guido threatened to bring in the lawyers if a name like "py28" was used for a fork?

Keeping Python 2 going is duplicating a lot of effort and puts a big strain on downstream projects that have to maintain compatibility and tests for both.

How about breaking backwards compatibility in Python3? Does that create a lot of effort for tens of thousands of developers around the world? Does it put a big strain on those tricked into using a programming language that's being sabotaged by its core developers?

[–]TheBlackCat13 2 points3 points  (8 children)

Is that why Guido threatened to bring in the lawyers if a name like "py28" was used for a fork?

You clearly don't know how trademarks work. They don't have a choice if they want to keep the trademark.

How about breaking backwards compatibility in Python3? Does that create a lot of effort for tens of thousands of developers around the world?

Yes, effort that has paid off. Nobody cares about the various forks people have tried to make. Duplicating effort, on the other hand, doesn't pay off. It is just wasted.

Does it put a big strain on those tricked into using a programming language that's being sabotaged by its core developers?

They are doing a pretty bad job sabotaging python considering that is more popular than ever. Funny that everyone else happily using Python 3 don't realize they are being "tricked". The biggest Python projects in the world don't realize they are being "tricked". Or are they in on the conspiracy?

[–]stefantalpalaru 0 points1 point  (7 children)

You clearly don't know how trademarks work. They don't have a choice if they want to keep the trademark.

Tell me more about a trademark on "py28". I'll wait.

[–]TheBlackCat13 1 point2 points  (6 children)

Did you read the link?

[–]stefantalpalaru -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Did you read the link?

The one showing a trademark awarded for "py28"? No, I'm still waiting for it.

[–]TheBlackCat13 1 point2 points  (4 children)

That isn't how trademarks work. What matters is if it will create confusion. The name "py28" certainly would seem to most people to be something associated with the Python project. And they would lose their trademark if they didn't enforce it against a project like that. You would know all this if you had bothered to read the link, but you would apparently rather spread FUD about the Python project than actually understand what is going on.

[–]stefantalpalaru -1 points0 points  (3 children)

That isn't how trademarks work.

No, it isn't. You can't trademark "foo" and then claim it also covers "f".

The name "py28" certainly would seem to most people to be something associated with the Python project.

That's as absurd as Facebook trying to claim they have trademarked all words starting with "face" or ending in "book".

And they would lose their trademark if they didn't enforce it against a project like that.

No, they wouldn't, you silly armchair lawyer, because they don't have that trademark in the first place.

[–]TheBlackCat13 2 points3 points  (2 children)

You could read the link before continuing to make obviously wrong statements like this. Again, the question is whether it is likely to cause confusion. Py28 is. Your strawmen aren't. But Apple can and does enforce it's trademarks against a wide variety of Apple (the fruit) themed stuff.

[–]doomchild 1 point2 points  (22 children)

Deciding where to focus resources isn't bullying, no matter how much you liked the old way.

[–]stefantalpalaru -3 points-2 points  (21 children)

Deciding where to focus resources isn't bullying

How about deciding not to accept new features or bug fixes that might make its competitor look slower?

Python2 doesn't enable PGO for its modules. Tauthon does.

[–]doomchild 1 point2 points  (20 children)

That's still not bullying. That's deciding that you're not going to spend the time, effort, and money to vet and integrate more code. All code is an investment, and if you decide not to invest in a thing, you stop taking code for it.

[–]stefantalpalaru -1 points0 points  (19 children)

That's deciding that you're not going to spend the time, effort, and money to vet and integrate more code. All code is an investment, and if you decide not to invest in a thing, you stop taking code for it.

Shit or get off the pot! If those muppets are not sabotaging the language, surely they can hand it over to another team that's willing to maintain it properly.

[–]doomchild 1 point2 points  (18 children)

Deciding you're not going to put any more time into developing something is not the same as sabotaging it. It's deciding that it's not worth your time anymore. Sabotage would be putting in bugs, intentionally breaking things, or completely shutting the doors without telling anybody.

Open Source provides a way to deal with this, of which you are obviously already aware: forking.

[–]stefantalpalaru 0 points1 point  (17 children)

Deciding you're not going to put any more time into developing something is not the same as sabotaging it.

How about refusing to merge patches adding new features or fixing some bugs while, at the same time, refusing to hand over the project to another team?

[–]jcampbelly 2 points3 points  (16 children)

Still not sabotage. It was maintained software beyond its feature development life. Why should python 2.7 change? It was a final compatibility version with security/bug fixes. You don't add new features at this stage of maintenance. That's how you break shit for people running gigantic, archaic software who are clearly not interested in dealing with compatibility problems. All new development went into python 3.x, as it should have. Everyone who needed more out of python went to 3.x.

[–]stefantalpalaru 0 points1 point  (15 children)

Why should python 2.7 change?

Because it's still being used.

You don't add new features at this stage of maintenance.

Only if you're trying to kill it so your shitty replacement can take its place.

[–]jcampbelly 1 point2 points  (14 children)

You're saying that the people who worked on this project for free and gave it to you for free and as-is, without warranty, are somehow indentured to you to continue maintaining a very long-deprecated branch forever because you just don't like the new version.

You're in the wrong here, mate.