[JohnFen]

> I've been running legacy Python servers continuously for 4+ years

That seems like a large amount of effort to make up for a large language deficiency. My (heartfelt) kudos to you!

I might have been willing to do the same if I used Python heavily (I don't because there are a number of other things that makes it very much "not for me") -- but it would still represent effort that shouldn't need to be engaged in.

[aragilar]

I think it depends on which bits of the Python ecosystem you're interacting with. The numerical/scientific parts have been quite stable for at least the past 10 years (new features have been added, but only small amounts of removal), compared with the more "AI" focused parts where I wouldn't trust the code to be working in 6 months. Similarly, some web frameworks are more stable than others. I think also over the last 5 or so years, there's been a change in maintainers of some larger projects, and the new maintainers have introduced more breaking changes than their predecessors.

None of this is implied by the language, I think it's much more driven by culture (though I think the final dropping of support for Python 2 did give some maintainers an excuse to do more breaking changes than was maybe required).

[heurist]

I'm not following. I've put in a total of a couple hours of maintenance over four years for the entire app stack. I think the maintenance issues and processes I use for Python would be the same as any other language. I remember my Java experience a decade back being essentially the same, the JS apps I am responsible have perpetual churn, and my .NET friends have said they feel behind if they're not keeping up with core changes every 6-12 months. Every asset, whether physical or digital, needs regular maintenance. What is different in your experience?