From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4B8D3857806 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:44:24 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org C4B8D3857806 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gnu.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=eliz@gnu.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:43389) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kIZbb-0001GQ-Si; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:44:23 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2326 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kIZbb-0007Hz-5k; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:44:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 18:44:31 +0300 Message-Id: <83k0wt7mlc.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Joel Brobecker Cc: andrew.burgess@embecosm.com, paulkoning@comcast.net, tom@tromey.com, gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20200916152329.GD5797@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:23:29 -0700) Subject: Re: Proposal to remove Python 2 support 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> <20200916152329.GD5797@adacore.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham 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 15:44:25 -0000 > Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:23:29 -0700 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: Paul Koning , Tom Tromey , > gdb@sourceware.org > > 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). That shouldn't be a problem: it's perfectly fine to say that some GDB feature requires Python 3.x. We already have something similar with Guile, I believe. > 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. That is not always possible, though. One may need a GDB feature that was introduced in a newer version, but still have good reason to be "stuck" with old Python versions.