Hacker News Reader

> I'm still surprised that it's taken this long to finally close support

That's because the Python community is too nice.

When Ruby or node broke compat, they just said "move or die". People moved.

When Python broke compat, they gave 7 years. People screamed, cried, complained, sweared it was impossible for them, that life was hard and the PSF was unfair.

They got an extension of 5 more years.

People still complained !

Hell, famous authors resented python 3 for years, refusing publicly to update their book.

On the other hand, the PSF had a very small budget, only few tiny donations and contributions by people or big companies that were saying they couldn't migrate that their lines of code. The same code that were making them a living, from a 25 years old amazing tech given to them for free.

My take on this is that if you are doing an open source project with a lot of volunteer work, don't be too nice. People have a tendency to abuse it. Save yourself trouble, and balance respect with users and convenience for you.

Maybe also don't make tools targeted at people who can't use proper tools.

Something about the "too nice" thing rubs me the wrong way. You gotta respect the people who develop the software. At the same time, the way people are deemed "complainers" reeks of contempt for the users. Yes, the users sometimes take your free work for granted. But you offered it. If you don't like the expectations that users assume are attached to it, you should say so upfront so they can become entangled with Ruby instead.

I don't think I disagree with your point in practice. Maybe in some details. I just don't think that not being credible in your plan to drop support on a given date is necessarily such a "nice" thing to do. You could say it's a "weak" thing to do. It doesn't help people prioritize the move and eventually hurts people by putting them into a jam on the day finally comes here. I think the ideal thing would be to break compatibility piece by piece, assuming it's really necessary, but be _understanding_ about it. Tell people "we understand that this is inconvenient for a certain number of people but have to cut it off at some place", not "stop complaining about free stuff".

> When Ruby or node broke compat, they just said "move or die". People moved.

Unless I'm missing something, this is a pretty disingenuous comparison. Ruby and Node breaking changes have been fairly small, Python 3 was anything but.

You can count your blessings. I think I know what company you’re talking about, and as far as I know they have no inclination to ever port anything. It’s the sort of company with enough money to pay to have their own runtime, simply because it’s organisationally easier to throw money at “maintenance” once established, than it is to do a big port or rewrite. Legacy support is a well-paying job, if depressing.

That's good to know, because I was a bit sad at the rejection, despite a chat with their tech lead setting off a few alarm bells.

Well, the largest companies in the world don't have to rely on volunteers, they can pay for continued support.

I've never worked for a company of that scale, so I don't know how hard it'll be to find legacy developers, but I imagine it'll take at least several years to port a public-facing system to Python 3, if they were to start now.

If they start in the next few years, I imagine it'll be much harder to find ready and willing Python 2 developers with the experience to navigate such a big code-base? They could hire consultants, but I imagine the future hiring cost will also be astronomical.

Well Python 3 came out in 2008, this date is known since 2014. If they start in the next few years, yes you'd expect it to be expensive.

But distribution vendors like Red Hat and Ubuntu have Python 2 in long term support distributions that they will give support for a few more years, so it is possible to use those. And after that they offer more years of support to paying customers. It's not necessary to hire programmers to do this for the companies needing support themselves.

> I'm still surprised that it's taken this long to finally close support. ... I interviewed at one of the top 5 investment banks for a software engineering ... My first question was what their plans were in porting ... it was "on the roadmap".

> Surely the Python core team are aware that teams like this exist in some of the largest companies in the world

Why would you assume they considered their users? Maybe they went purely for some abstract purity with tenuous benefits and didn't actually speak to their stakeholders. Remember, the "D" in BDFL stands for "dictator".

JP Morgan, isn't it?

The platform can already run in python 3. It's possible that the team you interviewed with wasn't aware of that.

Like all big companies, personal experience varies with the team and the part of the company you're in.

Nope, not JP Morgan, although I did interview with them too and they talked about some of their Python systems and how they were currently in the process of porting to Python 3.

I won't name names, but they're also in the top ten and based in America.