Fw: [PROPOSAL] To retire autoconf for 4.1

[Volker Lendecke]

On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:55:24PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> It is to some degree a different language. Python 3 is better in a lot of ways, but 
> I'm not a fan of the way the transition from 2.x to 3.0 was managed - and it shows
> in the number of packages that have migrated to 3.0. Unfortunately there's not
> much we can do about that now.

For that exact reason I don't believe that Python 2 will die
in any foreseeable time frame. Eventually someone might step
up and do a separate and parallel Python 3 implementation of
the bindings, but that should not affect the existing Samba
binding code. As I said -- it's the same as if someone
started to do bindings for Google go, Ruby or PHP.

Do you see the pattern here? This whole thread started
because the burden to support 2 build systems seems too high
for some developers. By choosing Python and not some fully
embeddable, shippable language like Lua or ECMAscript we
deliberately and knowingly chose to accept the very same
problem again.

> If Fedora were to consider dropping Python2.x support while there was still
> a large number of packages relying on it, I don't see why they wouldn't
> consider to do the same with m4 or autoconf. Neither seems realistic.

So -- there's no point in worrying about Python 3.

Volker

-- 
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de