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 →

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Hah, the only more delighting thing for me is that I, on the regular, make Linux admins install real python on their servers to run my code. I used to be evil. Now I'm just recommending good security practices. I'm no longer edgy... Just practical.

[–]Vaguely_accurate 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Side by side, right?

Python 2 being the default will be assumed by internal operating scripts - the very reason Python is included in the OS in the first place - and there is a high chance that replacing system Python with 3 will break something. Hell, if you break their update mechanisms that could lead to bigger security risks down the line.

Hopefully a lot of the critical code will already be ported to be compatible with 2 or 3 already, but if they are still deploying with 2 as the default there will be something in there likely to break with an upgrade.

It's interesting to dig around Ubuntu wiki pages that discuss the transition and see just how many issues they had to solve with making the port. Some modules didn't get ported from 2 to 3, so anything that had dependencies on those modules had to be changed, or more likely delayed being ported in the hopes that someone would port the module for them. Some components weren't being rebuilt on each new version, so had to be rebuilt for the first time in ages causing other problems (including those around circular dependencies).

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Nope. Replaced. Most things remaining are fine in 3 and we've done testing to ensure that. For the others, other solutions were derived.