myths about python 3

Steve Holden steve at
Thu Jan 28 20:51:48 CET 2010

Carl Banks wrote:
> On Jan 28, 8:10 am, a... at (Aahz) wrote:
>> In article <Zt68n.3893$pv.1... at>,
>> Neil Hodgson  <nyamatongwe+thun... at> wrote:
>>> Carl Banks:
>>>> There is also no hope someone will fork Python 2.x and continue it in
>>>> perpetuity.  Well, someone might try to fork it, but they won't be
>>>> able to call it Python.
>>>   Over time there may be more desire from those unable or unwilling to
>>> upgrade to 3.x to work on improvements to 2.x, perhaps leading to a
>>> version 2.8. One of the benefits of open source is that you are not
>>> trapped into following vendor decisions like Microsoft abandoning
>>> classic VB in favour of VB.NET.
>>>   It would be unreasonable for the core developers to try to block
>>> this. Refusing use of the Python trademark for a version that was
>>> reasonably compatible in both directions would be particularly petty.
>> Agreed, and as a PSF member, I'd certainly be opposed to anyone trying to
>> prevent the release of Python 2.8, and I would actively favor providing
>> PSF and resources to them.  OTOH, I would also be likely to
>> push anyone working on Python 2.8 to come up with a solid release plan
>> first.
> Well, I'd consider that an official release.  Note that I didn't claim
> there was no hope PSF wouldn't change it's mind on 2.8.  All I saying
> is that if PSF decides to shut down 2.x there's no hope of a rogue
> Python 2.x series replacing Python 3.x.
> Regardless of how magnaminous the people of PSF are, the unfortunate
> reality is that trademark owners are forced by the law to be
> "particularly petty".  PSF's IP lawyer will advise not to allow
> unsanctioned fork of Python 2.7 to call itself Python 2.8.
But if it were sanctioned ... ? We *are* pretty magnanimous ;-)

Steve Holden           +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
PyCon is coming! Atlanta, Feb 2010
Holden Web LLC       

More information about the Python-list mailing list