Python2 demotion (moving from main to universe) in progress

[Xen]

Ralf Mardorf schreef op 09-12-2017 15:18:

> See
> https://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2017-December/036974.html
> 
> The author "learned to be very selective" when he chose FLOSS software.

That basically supports the notion that it is unwise to depend on 
anything because those you have trusted with something might turn their 
back on you any day.

The move towards Python 3 was forced, it didn't come natural for anyone.

I don't even _want_  to program in 3.

   Lists became iterables. That is one glaring thing, even though I am 
novice in Python, that
   appalled me.

   Stuff was taken out (or moved away) that the devs considered "useless" 
(like the filter
   function) but they don't give you the choice.

   I mean if people still used it, apparently it was useful.



> We FLOSS users can't blame upstream, since "warranty" is mentioned more
> than one time by ......................

That is just a license to be "regardless" you know, without regard for 
those you have made dependent on you.

The NO WARRANTY claim is one of the greatest evils of the Linux world.

A normal business says "We care about you". This says the exact 
opposite.

Hence you find so much discord and selfishness.

If you are inspired by a phrase that amounts to "We don't care about 
you", you shouldn't expect to find _care_ in the software they produce.

Not just regardless, but also careless.

And as a result, usually hostile...............



> let alone that python does use a custom license,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Python_Software_Foundation_License

The same screaming is in that license too.

Even the assertion that there is no guarantee that by using Python, you 
don't infringe on other people's rights.

A sort of legal unguarantee that it's legal.

But even though this is meant to convey a status quo about the current 
moment, so to put it, it is then used far beyond the current moment to 
imply that they can also always pull your leg from out of under you.

So it is originally meant as a _passive_ thing, of something not in 
motion.

Yet then they start moving, and use the same terms to #%@$ with you.

It is not really meant to say "We won't break our software" (or the lack 
of promise surrounding that), but it is meant to say "It is not broken" 
(or the lack of promise surrounding that) because it is the license of a 
release.

Software that is not changed can also not break. But then they go on to 
actively ensure that you cannot use the old version anymore, not by way 
of natural decay, but by way of active desire, or promotion, or 
obstruction, or whatever.


And you know what is always the funniest part?

First this:

a) EXPRESS OR IMPLIED

And then this:

b) Python is a programming language that lets you work quickly and 
integrate systems more effectively. Learn More

So they break their own license, they are expressly implying that it is 
fit for a certain purpose.

You shouldn't speak in double tongues.

Either you don't imply or expressly state something, or you do, but 
don't first say you don't, and then do it regardless.


> Using FLOSS requires self-responsibility. Maintainers of a Linux or BSD
> "ecosystem" such as Ubuntu need to make decisions.

Yes a decision to fight for stability for instance.

> While I'm against snappy and Co., the benefit of snappy and Co. is
> working around some issues of the shared software approach.

Of course.

People always complained of the "Windows DLL hell", but really...