<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body style="font-family:Arial;font-size:14px"><p>
Nolan,<br>
<br>
Indeed you might be thinking that you are reminding people of some obvious piece of wisdom to conduct a search for old articles, but indeed this is a fools errand (unless you are suggesting such messages were very recent in the last 30 to 45 days, which I did not get the impression you were).<br>
<br>
Why you ask?<br>
<br>
Python is still under heavy development and unless these older messages specifically substantiate what the exact version of Python existed at the time the messages were written and what specific Python version they were referring to, their content and meaning may be entirely inapplicable now as perhaps the technical concerns at issue at the time may well have been overcome my changes to the Python language or been amended in the current instantiation of the Chirp source code base. In either event, we would not gain such insights from old messages. Thus, obviously asking what the issues are now is a very different question from "what were the issues then?", a question I did not ask and therefore had no need to research the answer for.<br>
<br>
Secondly, you can't agree with me that "Python 3 would be nice to have", because I did not say that. I meant to assert in the most compelling manner that I could articulate that the idea of moving to Python3 is an imperative and to not do so terribly disadvantages users and retards the security of a system they are expected to continue to keep Python2 running upon.<br>
<br>
Let me clear here, I appreciate all the hard work that Dan, et alia, have put into Chirp and mean in no way to diminish the excellence of that work or to suggest any lack of appreciation. Moreover, if the argument is "We can't move to Python2 because its a part time project and nobody has time." I understand and accept that fully. However, that in no way changes the fact that distributing software in a now virtually unsupported language instigates a very high risk for the users of that software in such a case. Moving to Python3 is something that must happen, just as many programs written for Amateur Radio are no longer used because they ran on TRS-80s and Apple IIs, and we don't use that technology anymore. Chirp will eventually move in such a direction if it is not ported to Python3 soon (or some other secure language) as people that care about the security posture of their systems will be loath to remain to keep an environment running that is not longer be actively patched with security patches and having bugs remediated there within.<br>
<br>
<br>
73,<br>
<br>
Stuart, N3GWG<br>
</p>
<br></body></html>