From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from rock.gnat.com (rock.gnat.com [205.232.38.15]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07F573857021 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:23:32 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 07F573857021 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=adacore.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=brobecker@adacore.com Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C588156286; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:23:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id H8z76JwD87bc; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:23:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A5456283; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:23:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 939B8865F9; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:23:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:23:29 -0700 From: Joel Brobecker To: Andrew Burgess Cc: fedor_qd@mail.ru, Paul Koning , Tom Tromey , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Proposal to remove Python 2 support Message-ID: <20200916152329.GD5797@adacore.com> References: <87sgbiahur.fsf@tromey.com> <3415E02F-C35C-4C72-8C9A-C141E024F3AC@comcast.net> <1600210499.574691995@f12.my.com> <20200916130013.GC5797@adacore.com> <20200916135312.GB3030@embecosm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200916135312.GB3030@embecosm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:23:33 -0000 > > I don't know how long this is going to be True, but "distros" have > > been shipping Python 3.x for quite a while now, so lack of Python 2 > > support wouldn't prevent you from building GDB with Python support > > enabled. > > But a user might potentially have a significant body of Python 2 code > that they run through GDB, so it's not as simple as "just" building > with Python 3 and off they go. That is true, and I understand that. I have been involved in quite a few transitions from Python 2 to Python 3, and it's been a lot of work for a number of projects. That being said, we need to be careful and try to find the right balance between the users who are still stuck on Python 2, those who have made the effort to transition in time, and the cost of keeping Python 2 support for a little longer. If the cost remains reasonable, then of course, let's help everyone. Here, what we are talking about, is the fact that keeping Python 2 support would delay the implementation of a feature (or force us to implement it in a way that's more complex -- something I don't think Tom is interested in doing). The question therefore is: Do we wait a little more to see what entities outside our community decide to do re: Python 2.x support, at the cost of delaying some features and improvements? I don't have a strong opinion on this. My feeling is that the end of Python 2.x is something we have known about for a very long time, and those still stuck on it have a workaround: They can continue using older versions of GDB. > I think once distros start to drop Python 2 then there's a really good > argument that GDB should drop Python 2 also, but before then we need > to go in with our eyes open, if the distros still ship Python 2 then > users might be annoyed if they have to rewrite their scripts. -- Joel