Because I was referring to coldtea's demands.
> What a cop out. A lack of being paid (money at least) doesn't imply no obligations, nor freedom from criticism.
Excellent, then you should be fine with me criticizing the attitude that's been displayed here.
> The issue here is suggesting you shouldn't freely criticise flaws in FOSS software. This is harmful, and goes directly to affecting information people have available to them in choosing whether or not to use a piece of software ion the first place.
Why is this the conclusion you draw from my posts? I said it before, the Python 3 transition sucked. It's something we kind of all agree on. There is plenty of criticism to be made.
However, I really want to recontextualize this: Django is an open source project, maintained by a non-profit. Python is an open source project, maintained by a non-profit. The projects in question, with "tens of millions of lines of Python 2 code" (only a tiny amount of which would need to be ported, but I disgress...), are most often for-profit projects. Yeah, it's a bit rich.
This is the same as the IE6 situation: Want support for it? Pay extra for it! You should not expect free support for technology for which the EOL was announced years in advance just because you're using a lot of it. And you will have no issue finding paid support. Heck tell you what, if you do, shoot me an email, I do contract work sometimes.
You know why FOSS is great? It's great because the PSF/DSF do not get to revoke your license to use the software they're no longer supporting. You get to use it forever. This is your freedom and it's a good one. Make use of it!