Dave H wrote:
> > The point is that P3 is a superset of P2.
>
> It is possible to write code that will compile and run in both environments by coding carefully and by making use of compatibility libraries (shims).
For sure. It's possible to use another lib to solve the issue. And then use another shared Backwards Library to get rid of the issue. And then we have to have another lib which solves the issues of the first additional lib.
>But it's no longer sensible to to so (or to require to do so). It was and people have been doing it for quite a while. But python2 is now dead. It's no longer safe or sensible to compile or use anything with python2. So python3 is the only environment that matters, apart from any courtesy support for anybody who's been a little slow catching on.
Obviously you don't look into the tickets - otherwise you would have seen that
there are a lot requests for 4.2. And there are much more issues which will
impact the code base. I think there already gcc10 issues.
I consider it rude to write about those people that they are "a little slow cathing on". You
don't know why they stick to old systems.
> JMHO: Since you apparently don't even know how to spell python, I have trouble taking anything you say terribly seriously anyway.
Right: I don't do programming. I'm doing admin and KM stuff. This discussion is about releasehandling and requiremtenthandling.
Let's reconsider the situation:
Since month there is a serious shortage of experienced programers on tvh. It is not even possible to analyse SIG11 faults, to solve EPG issues or get improvements in the PID are. Sure: it takes a while to become familiar with the project.
Do you really think it is a good idea to - as you wrote - introduce features of "a different but related language." and throw away P2 comatibility without drawing a clear line ?
I have seen lots of projects dying. Usually the last phase starts with quick-fix-wins which are introducing new and fancy features. With people telling that the others are "slow" and yesterday. Next step are commits that leads to surprising sideeffects - which noone is going to fix: the experience ramp up takes a while.
> But making clean and separate releases in general is a good idea.
I proposed a label already month ago.
This would have avoided the situation where new issues have to be solved in dev tree. All the p3, gcc10 extensions should better be done in dev. 4.5 - instead now everything has to be done in one codebase.
I have heard between the lines exactly your statement: "trouble taking anything you say terribly seriously anyway."
That is the difference: I know that I don't know much about programming.