[Neuroimaging] Python 3 statement

[Gael Varoquaux]

I think that this is taking the problem by the wrong end. It's using the
stick rather than the carrot. If people have no other arguments to
convince to move to Python 3 than the fact that support is going to end,
users are not going to think much of us.

No, the right way is to convince the ecosystem, mainly Afni and FSL that
they should be using Python 3. I tried for FSL. I don't know if I was
successful.

What would be important is to outline the great things that can be done
with Python 3, to convince people writing code that they would be more
productive in Python 3. Possibly, if a feature is much easier to be
implemented in Python 3 than Python 2, than you should code that feature
only for 3.

Think in terms of users, not developers. It really defeats me than no
argument on that page is about how great Python 3 is.

This looks like planned obsolescence. Why should users rewrite code if
their life is not getting better?

The risk, by the way, is simply that they will stick with old versions of
the projects for quite a while.

Gaël

PS: I am all in favor of Python, and all my code is Python-3 compatible.

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 06:58:48PM -0800, Ariel Rokem wrote:
> Hello everyone, 

> I just learned about this statement this morning:

> http://www.python3statement.org/

> What do folks here think about this? Should we sign on to this? 

> Cheers, 

> Ariel

> _______________________________________________
> Neuroimaging mailing list
> Neuroimaging at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/neuroimaging


-- 
    Gael Varoquaux
    Researcher, INRIA Parietal
    NeuroSpin/CEA Saclay , Bat 145, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette France
    Phone:  ++ 33-1-69-08-79-68
    http://gael-varoquaux.info            http://twitter.com/GaelVaroquaux