[tedmiston]

The problem with this logic is it could be extended indefinitely into the future.

Python 3.3 has been available since 2012. 2020 was already a deadline that had been pushed back at least once for 2.x. I understand volatility, but 5+ years in the software world is an eternity.

[jimmyswimmy]

I guess we're getting off topic here but can't help myself.

> ...5+ years in the software world is an eternity.

There is no particular reason why we can't maintain stability. I can still run [some] Microsoft DOS programs from the '80s, though finally most of them need DOSBox to run. For the scientific programming community we need to be able to rely on relatively ancient code. This is why FORTRAN and Matlab are still used. For example the release notes for g77 at https://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/ say

> Legacy g77 code will compile fine in almost all cases

That's code from 1977 - 40 years ago! And the release notes are just nudging people towards the 1995 language standard, not declaring deprecation.

[wyldfire]

> There is no particular reason why we can't maintain stability. I can still run [some] Microsoft DOS programs from the '80s

In fact, there isn't, you are 100% correct. I don't think anyone on the python dev team thinks that somehow 2.7 "can't" be maintained.

Grab the 2.7 branch [1] and build and test it on your favorite OS. If it still works tomorrow or next year, or in the 2080s, congratulations! You got a working product and you apparently didn't need any support.

> That's code from 1977 - 40 years ago!

Python's popularity will ensure that some group, somewhere will champion 2.7. And maybe in ~2030 we'll still see active support.

[1] https://github.com/python/cpython/tree/2.7

[sametmax]

But you can. You will be able to run Python 2 in 5 years if you want. Nobody prevents you too. The official community will just stop working on it. Just like for DOS, which an alternative community picked up.

[coldtea]

>The problem with this logic is it could be extended indefinitely into the future.

So? Why shouldn't it? The world still needs (and runs) untold millions of lines of Cobol.

It would take billions of money to move it over -- and it will take millions to move over legacy Python 2.x codebases.

[sametmax]

If you have that cash, you can pay Continmum for commercial support and stop asking people to give you stuff for free forever.

Or, alternatively, you can start spending your week end, for free, working on maintaining it.

[wyldfire]

> The world still needs (and runs) untold millions of lines of Cobol.

shrug python organization isn't responsible for delivering a Cobol toolchain. They said they've set a deadline and it's open source so there's bound to be some popular vendors out there who you can buy support from. Just like you buy support from your Cobol vendor.

Most people who consume python are consuming it from a downstream vendor like a linux distro anyways. Commercial distros will likely offer extended support packages.