Hi all,I'd also support this decision.For information, here is an another link to a related discussion - https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/scikit-image/7aH6hshJJg0/ykjxdZ8uMQAJ .Juan,I don't think we're there yet for 1.0, though :). From my standpoint, several important aspects (metaparams handling, API, xy->rc, etc) have to be addressed first (see `discussion` tag on GitHub).Stefan,Has the schedule been changed? I remember we were planning to release 0.14 in November 2017 (see https://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-image/2017-September/005352.html).Regards,Egor Panfilov2017-11-12 2:55 GMT+03:00 Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni.soma@gmail.com>:I agree. I would suggest backporting bugfixes to 0.14 for 2 years, or not naming it LTS because 1y is not “long term” by most definitions.imho we should aim for 1.0 for this time next year and maybe *that* can depend on Python >= 3.6. =)Juan.On 11 Nov 2017, 6:52 PM +1100,imagepy@sina.com, wrote:Just my own opinion. we can give up python2.x -- YXDragon----- 原始邮件 -----发件人：Stefan van der Walt <stefanv@berkeley.edu>主题：[scikit-image] Python 3 transition日期：2017年11月11日 14点34分Hi, everyoneI'd like to make a 4th attempt to determine our transition pathway toPython 3. The last thread is here:I would like to propose that the next version, 0.14 (scheduled for Marchof next year), becomes the last targeted for Python 2. It will also bean LTS (Long Time Support), which means we will backport serious fixesfor a period of one year. 0.15 will then target Python >= 3.5 only(sorry, no f-strings yet!).Let me know your thoughts.Stéfan_______________________________________________ scikit-image mailing list_______________________________________________ scikit-image mailing list_______________________________________________ scikit-image mailing list_______________________________________________scikit-image mailing list