On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 14:55:35 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote: I don't think so; I think there is an effective difference of about 6–9 months. Just O(1), of course, but so are the release cadences of OS distributions and major packages.
In NEP 29 I see a 42 month window; in Proposal 2 I also see a 42 month window. Where does the 6-9 month difference come from? I see NEP 29 uses the *anticipated* release date; probably so that as soon as a release is planned, it will be clear which python versions will be supported by it and that delay won't mean pulling python versions from the supported list. [For both Proposal 1 and Proposal 2 it may be a good idea to also be explicit about the way the 42 month window is pegged] Do you anticipate Proposal 1 and 2 to differ in what they use as indicator date for the 42 month window? The main difference between the wordings of the two proposals seems to be: "the SageMath project clarifies that it is invalid for a developer to demand that we drop support immediately at the stated time". So I think that means Proposal 2 explicitly advocates for discussion of each PR that drops support, rather than the default date-based accept that Proposal 1 advocates. Can you elaborate on the advantages of that? Do you anticipate that the 42 month window is too short? Particularly with how easy it is nowadays with conda to install fresh python versions as a user, is it onerous for people to get a new python when they upgrade sage? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/571efa0d-b0a1-42a7-9e21-d778bbc9e2f0n%40googlegroups.com.
