An example of Python 3 promotion attitude
There was a discussion a while ago about python 3 and the attitude on social media and there was a lack of examples. Here is one example: https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/3nl5ut/ninite_the_popular_website_t... According to some people, it is everybodys job to promote python 3 and force people to upgrade. This is really not something I enjoy (people telling me pypy should promote python 3 - it's not really our job). Now I sometimes feel that there is not enough sentiment in python-dev to distance from such ideas. It *is* python-dev job to promote python3, but it's also python-dev job sometimes to point out that whatever helps in promoting the python ecosystem (e.g. in case of pypy is speed) is a good enough reason to do those things. I wonder what are other people ideas about that. Cheers, fijal
On Oct 6, 2015 4:31 AM, "Maciej Fijalkowski" <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
There was a discussion a while ago about python 3 and the attitude on social media and there was a lack of examples. Here is one example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/3nl5ut/ninite_the_popular_website_t...
According to some people, it is everybodys job to promote python 3 and force people to upgrade. This is really not something I enjoy (people telling me pypy should promote python 3 - it's not really our job).
I'm not a core dev so I don't really have a dog in this fight (except that I do like python 3 the language), but: in the interests of having a more productive discussion, can you elaborate on what specifically you found frustrating about that link? It seems to be a page of people talking in a measured way about the trade offs between python 2 and python 3. It looked to me like probably the majority opinion expressed was that for the poster's personal uses python 3 was superior for specific reasons that they described, but people generally seemed very respectful and open to the possibility that their experience wasn't universal. Your email had me expecting something very different, so I'm wondering what I'm missing. -n
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 07:36 Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
On Oct 6, 2015 4:31 AM, "Maciej Fijalkowski" <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
There was a discussion a while ago about python 3 and the attitude on social media and there was a lack of examples. Here is one example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/3nl5ut/ninite_the_popular_website_t...
According to some people, it is everybodys job to promote python 3 and force people to upgrade. This is really not something I enjoy (people telling me pypy should promote python 3 - it's not really our job).
I'm not a core dev so I don't really have a dog in this fight (except that I do like python 3 the language), but: in the interests of having a more productive discussion, can you elaborate on what specifically you found frustrating about that link? It seems to be a page of people talking in a measured way about the trade offs between python 2 and python 3. It looked to me like probably the majority opinion expressed was that for the poster's personal uses python 3 was superior for specific reasons that they described, but people generally seemed very respectful and open to the possibility that their experience wasn't universal. Your email had me expecting something very different, so I'm wondering what I'm missing.
I'm in the same position as Nathaniel. I was expecting a flood of comments yelling that not supporting Python 3 was horrible and they should be burned at the stake for heresy or something. Instead I found very reasonable responses to questions and only 2 people who went overboard, both of whom admitted they were wrong when their arguments were shown to be extreme or invalid. While I can imagine the kind of responses that Glyph was talking about at the language summit I don't quite see how this is an example of that.
On 10/6/2015 7:29 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
There was a discussion a while ago about python 3 and the attitude on social media and there was a lack of examples. Here is one example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/3nl5ut/ninite_the_popular_website_t...
I read this. The proposition on the table for debate is "Ninite -- the popular website to install essential programs at once -- should start offering Python 3 instead of Python 2" The current situation (as of today) is that Ninite offers to install and update about 85 programs. Among these is 'Python', which they translate as 2.7.10. My first answer is that this makes their claim to keep people updated, "Always Up-to-Date", a lie because the most recent update to 'Python' is 3.5.0. I have no idea if they are editorially holding back updates to other programs or not. In other words, the proposition was whether Ninite should do what they promise to do. My second answer is that for Python, they should offer 'Python2' and 'Python3'. Many people said this also.
According to some people, it is everybodys job to promote python 3 and force people to upgrade.
The discussion is about Ninite. They claim that they install the most up to date version of each program users select and (forcibly, and silently) update everything when they *choose* to re-run it. They are not doing that with Python. Someone who emailed them reported back "they're considering it but holding off for now due to the fact that most people still use Py2." To the extent that this is true, and it not in all contexts, it is partly because they are helping to keep it true by implicitly claiming that Python2 is Python and Python3 is not. There was peripherally mention of a 4-year-document called LPTHW that recommends 2. I have no idea what they are referring to. There was also inconsequential mention of RHEL.
This is really not something I enjoy (people telling me pypy should promote python 3 - it's not really our job).
Pypy is not mentioned in the discussion you linked. Your job is what you conceive it to be. If you don't claim to support or promote the latest Python version, you have no obligation to do so.
Now I sometimes feel that there is not enough sentiment in python-dev to distance from such ideas. It *is* python-dev job to promote python3, but it's also python-dev job sometimes to point out that whatever helps in promoting the python ecosystem (e.g. in case of pypy is speed) is a good enough reason to do those things.
This is *your* idea of what *our* job is ;-). I think our job *as python core developers* is to collectively produce the best new releases we can within the constraints of policies and resources. That currently includes further releases of 2.7. Each core dev interprets and augments the above for themselves. -- Terry Jan Reedy
Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> writes:
There was peripherally mention of a 4-year-document called LPTHW that recommends 2. I have no idea what they are referring to.
It is expanded in passing, but for reference they are talking about “Learn Python the Hard Way” <URL:http://learnpythonthehardway.org/>, a book which (reportedly) has not been updated since 2010. -- \ “Liberal capitalism is not at all the Good of humanity. Quite | `\ the contrary; it is the vehicle of savage, destructive | _o__) nihilism.” —Alain Badiou | Ben Finney
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
There was peripherally mention of a 4-year-document called LPTHW that recommends 2. I have no idea what they are referring to.
It is expanded in passing, but for reference they are talking about “Learn Python the Hard Way” <URL:http://learnpythonthehardway.org/>, a book which (reportedly) has not been updated since 2010.
which is too bad -- I've recommended LPTHW for years for newbies -- and just started teaching a new "into to python" class -- now it py3! I do still recommend LPTHW, but now they'll have to add parentheses to all those print statements(functions).... I suppose we should all bug Zed Shaw to write a LPTHW3 .... -Chris
-- \ “Liberal capitalism is not at all the Good of humanity. Quite | `\ the contrary; it is the vehicle of savage, destructive | _o__) nihilism.” —Alain Badiou | Ben Finney
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/chris.barker%40noaa.gov
-- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception Chris.Barker@noaa.gov
On 6 October 2015 at 21:29, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
Now I sometimes feel that there is not enough sentiment in python-dev to distance from such ideas. It *is* python-dev job to promote python3, but it's also python-dev job sometimes to point out that whatever helps in promoting the python ecosystem (e.g. in case of pypy is speed) is a good enough reason to do those things.
I wonder what are other people ideas about that.
It's not generally python-dev's job to promote Python 3 either - folks are here for their own reasons, and that's largely a shared aim of making a better programming language and other tools for our own future use (whatever those use cases may be). The fact that there are lots of *other* people that find those tools useful and helpful (to the point of elevating Python to being one of the most popular programming languages in the world) is a beneficial side effect of doing that work in the open, rather than necessarily being the reason people decide to participate. This is the key difference between community open source projects and commercial products that also happen to be open source - in the latter case, good luck getting anything added that doesn't align with the sponsoring company's plans, while in the community driven case, we don't *have* a pre-defined road map, we have a lot of individual contributors with possible ideas for improvement (occasionally company sponsored, usually not), and a range of processes for reviewing, refining and deciding on whether or not to accept those ideas. That said, those of us that get paid to be here (even part time), typically *do* have a significant obligation not to leave current Python 2 users behind, hence the extended lifecycle for the 2.7 series, and the ongoing work in lowering barriers to migration from Python 2 to Python 3. Those of us working for commercial redistributors (depending on our specific role) are also likely to have at least some obligation to our customers to help them understand the implications of the migration, and assure them that we'll help them manage the shift in a minimally disruptive way. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
On Oct 7, 2015, at 7:12 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6 October 2015 at 21:29, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
Now I sometimes feel that there is not enough sentiment in python-dev to distance from such ideas. It *is* python-dev job to promote python3, but it's also python-dev job sometimes to point out that whatever helps in promoting the python ecosystem (e.g. in case of pypy is speed) is a good enough reason to do those things.
I wonder what are other people ideas about that.
It's not generally python-dev's job to promote Python 3 either - folks are here for their own reasons, and that's largely a shared aim of making a better programming language and other tools for our own future use (whatever those use cases may be).
I concur. Our responsibilities are to make Python 3 into an effective tool that makes people *want* to adopt it and to be honest with anyone who asks us about the pros and cons of switching over. Raymond
participants (8)
-
Ben Finney -
Brett Cannon -
Chris Barker -
Maciej Fijalkowski -
Nathaniel Smith -
Nick Coghlan -
Raymond Hettinger -
Terry Reedy