On 2/11/20 4:05 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > Or just the recognition that, eventually, technical debt has to be > paid.
Speaking about technical debt is certainly fashionable these days. As if we've somehow discovered a brand new way of looking at things. But it doesn't matter what you do, there's always real cost, and therefore always technical debt. Moving to Python 3 incurs technical debt. Staying with Python 2 incurs technical debt. Thus I wonder if the term is actually that useful. I know what you mean, though. The cost of staying with Python2 is increasing rapidly compared to the cost of porting to Python3. Unlike the nebulous term, "technical debt," the cost of staying with Python2 vs porting to Python3 can be quantified in real dollar amounts. I've no doubt that the calculus is in favor of Python2 a while longer for many people. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
