[Neuroimaging] Python 3 statement

[Christopher J Markiewicz]

I would comfortably, if not exactly enthusiastically, vote in favor of this.

The number of times I've come across people still wanting 2.6 support
(CentOS...) makes me dread the issues and email threads that are bound
to ensue.

On 11/30/2016 10:05 PM, Ben Cipollini wrote:
> Oh gosh, please let's! This whole 2.7 vs 3.x thing has been terrible.
> 
> I wonder by then, however, if there will be a backwards-breaking Python
> 4 :-(
> 
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Ariel Rokem <arokem at gmail.com
> <mailto:arokem at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Hello everyone, 
> 
>     I just learned about this statement this morning:
> 
>     http://www.python3statement.org/ <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 <mailto:Neuroimaging at python.org>
>     https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/neuroimaging
>     <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/neuroimaging>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Neuroimaging mailing list
> Neuroimaging at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/neuroimaging
> 


-- 
Christopher J Markiewicz
Ph.D. Candidate, Quantitative Neuroscience Laboratory
Boston University