On 9/3/20 12:39 PM, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote: >> There may be other reasons to keep Python 2 support, but as Richard >> says RHEL 6 will stop being one of them before our next point release >> after this one. > > And then how long for users to update? Two years? Three years?
The point of published lifecycles is so people can plan appropriately. The end of security support should be the end of the migration, not the start of it. Now, I do understand that people get caught in bad situations for various reasons, and I have a couple of those. But that doesn't mean it would be reasonable for me to expect the latest software to still work in that environment. In such cases, you freeze things in time, mitigate security risks as best you can, and try to work you way out of the bad situation. > Gentoo thought that. But they do not any more. Just the Gentoo work so > far has been a massive headache for Gentoo, and the TODO list is still > very long. Too many things, like Kodi, that still need Python 2. Large > amounts of critical infrastructure are still ython 2 only. That is an argument about a different issue: whether distros/upstream Python should stop supporting Python 2. We are talking about whether NTPsec should continue to support Python 2. NTPsec can require Python 3 as long as all distros that NTPsec supports can install Python 3. For example, if someone is using RHEL 7 and needs Python 2 for mission critical code, that has no impact on NTPsec's decision. NTPsec can require Python 3 and such a user can still use the latest NTPsec on RHEL 7, because Python 2 and Python 3 are co-installable. -- Richard
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
