On 3/11/16 1:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Léonard Benedetti <benedetti@mlpo.fr> writes:
>> Despite all that, I think this transition to Python 3 is wise, it is
>> available since 2008. Python 2 is legacy and its last version (2.7) is a
>> “end-of-life release�.
>
> Doesn't matter. We support both Python 2 and 3, and this script must
> do so as well, else it's not getting committed. Any desupport for
> Python 2 in PG is very far away; no one has even suggested we consider
> it yet.
This script is only run occasionally when the unaccent data needs to be
updated from Unicode data, so it's not really that important what
language and version it's written in. That said, the mentioned reason
for changing this to Python 3 is so that one can include Unicode
characters into the source text, which I find undesirable in general
(for PostgreSQL source code) and not very useful in this particular
case. I think the script can be kept in Python 2 style. Making it
upward compatible with Python 3 can be a separate (small) project.