Re: [GRASS-PSC] Min. req. of programming language standard support, GRASS GIS 8

Hi all,

On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 8:15 AM Nicklas Larsson via grass-dev
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Good, Anna, you brought up this question on regular update of Python version support. I deliberately left that part out of the draft for setting/updating language standards, as I would argue it deserves a RFC on its own.

I agree to both:

- we need to find a formula with our release rhythm and the oldest
still supported Python version,
- and yes, please let's separate this out into a different discussion
(RFC if needed).

I.e., one C/C++ RFC and one Python RFC.

> A RFC should't be updatable, but may be overridden, partly or completely, with a new RFC. Adopting adherence to a new C or C++ standard will most likely be a quite rare business and should be dealt with a new RFC.

I agree to that, as it would become a moving target otherwise.

> The discussed approach, following the Python versions life-cycle, could possibly look a little different, however the forms and modes for this should be established likewise with a RFC.
>
> If we agree now, to set Python 3.6 as a minimum, we have roughly six months to work out such a procedure. I’m glad to assist to this in, say around, October, in time for the 3.6 retirement.

Let me suggest to separate Python out into another discussion.
The pace of C/++ standards and that of Python versions are quite
different and not easy to handle in a single RFC.

Just my 0.02 cents,

Markus
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev