Not wanting to answer for Wes, but those are two sides of the same coin: reducing CI overhead and complexity helps increase developer productivity. Reducing CI overhead is not a goal *in itself* (unless there are money issues I don't know about) ;-)
The productivity cost of being Python 2-compatible is not very high *currently* (since much of the cost is a sunk cost by now), but these things all add up. So at some point we should really drop Python 2. Whether it's 2019 or 2020, I don't know and I don't get to decide. However, anything later than 2020 is excessively conservative IMHO. Regards Antoine. Le 06/08/2018 à 19:46, Robert Nishihara a écrit : > Wes, do you primarily want to drop Python 2 to speed up Travis or to reduce > the development overhead? In my experience the development overhead is > minimal and well worth it. For Travis, we could consider looking into other > options like paying for more concurrency. > > January 2019 is very soon and Python 2 is still massively popular. > > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 5:11 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> The 40+ minutes Travis-CI job already uses the toolchain packages AFAIK. >>> Don't they include thrift? >> >> I was referring to your comment about "parquet-cpp AppVeyor builds are >> abysmally slow". I think the slowness is in significant part due to >> the ExternalProject builds, where Thrift is the worst offender. >> >
