[loeg]

You're coloring the history with a lot more hostility than the reality. And the condescension is really unnecessary.

This matches the pattern of Python.org developers and python 3 aficionados being unnecessarily hostile and condescending to the concerns of Python 2 language users. You saw that in 2010; you saw it again in 2015; and you can see it in these threads today.

[joshuamorton]

Can you explain the specific actions that were taken that didn't cater to, as you say, "python2 language users"? A 12 year migration timeline seems, to me, to be fairly lax.

[strenholme]

I saw a lot of hostility right here in 2019 when I pointed out some Python 2 programs are nay to impossible to port to Python 2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21258527

[joshuamorton]

None of the things you mentioned are particularly difficult though. In fact you're still in the realm of changes that can be trivially automated with https://python-modernize.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fixers.htm..., the three issues you describe are the print, xrange_six, and classic_division fixers.

It's certainly possible that there are parts of the migration that would be tricky, a quick skim of the file didn't give me any obvious ones, but it's also huge and hard to read, so I very well could have missed something.

Most of the truly challenging things to migrate involved some combination of extension modules, heavy metaprogramming (eval/exec), and apis which change significantly between 2 and 3 (most of which are string related, but some libraries also decided to do backwards incompatible things)

[talentedcoin]

I am definitely guilty of being "hostile and condescending" to people asking the Python.org developers to waste time supporting Python 2. Please just stop. This time would be better spent working on the packaging situation rather than relitigating the last 12 years.

If people still want to work on Python 2 projects that's fine and it's their choice, but it's time to just let the rest of us go our own way.