<div>                Hi,<br><br>Although I didn't see the need to remove Python from RFC 7 (as it was originally formulated), there is also some logic to treat Python as a whole in a separate RFC. I don't have strong opinion on either way, therefore I lifted out Python from the draft, which now only deals with C and C++. Hopefully it may now be ready for vote :).<br><br>Regarding Python: I believe version support should be linked to Python end-of-life circle and GRASS minor version.<br><br>Best,<br>Nicklas<br>            </div>            <div class="yahoo_quoted" style="margin:10px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid #ccc;padding-left:1ex;">                        <div style="font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">                                <div>                    On Sunday, 21 March 2021, 09:04:24 CET, Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org> wrote:                </div>                <div><br></div>                <div><br></div>                <div><div dir="ltr">Hi,<br clear="none"><br clear="none">On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 8:30 PM Veronica Andreo <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:veroandreo@gmail.com" href="mailto:veroandreo@gmail.com">veroandreo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Hi everyone<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> Thanks for all the feedback.<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> In practical terms then, shall we:<br clear="none">> - remove all python references from the Language Standards draft RFC [0] and vote only for C/C++, while creating a separate RFC for the minimum python version?<br clear="none">> - add a formula that sets on which pace the minimum supported python version will change to the Language Standards draft RFC [0] and vote for everything altogether?<br clear="none"><br clear="none">For Python support, it is worth looking at the GDAL RFC 77 which<br clear="none">includes useful tables and links:<br clear="none">- <a shape="rect" href="https://gdal.org/development/rfc/rfc77_drop_python2_support.html" target="_blank">https://gdal.org/development/rfc/rfc77_drop_python2_support.html</a><br clear="none"><br clear="none">esp.:<br clear="none">- <a shape="rect" href="https://endoflife.date/python#:~:text=The%20support%20for%20Python%202.7,dropping%20support%20for%20Python%202.7" target="_blank">https://endoflife.date/python#:~:text=The%20support%20for%20Python%202.7,dropping%20support%20for%20Python%202.7</a><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Useful is also<br clear="none">- <a shape="rect" href="https://repology.org/project/python/versions" target="_blank">https://repology.org/project/python/versions</a><br clear="none"><br clear="none">With respect to the pace of periodic review and updating of the<br clear="none">language standards support I believe that we need that at the pace of<br clear="none">sub-major releases (e.g., 7.8 -> 7.9). Just look back at the major<br clear="none">releases (<a shape="rect" href="https://grass.osgeo.org/about/history/releases/" target="_blank">https://grass.osgeo.org/about/history/releases/</a>) we observe<br clear="none">quite some time span:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">- (2021) GRASS GIS 8.0.0<br clear="none">- 2015 GRASS GIS 7.0.0<br clear="none">- 2005 GRASS GIS 6.0.0<br clear="none">- 2002 GRASS GIS 5.0.0<br clear="none">- 1991 GRASS 4.0<br clear="none">- 1988 GRASS 3.0<br clear="none">- 1987 GRASS 2.0<br clear="none">- 1984 GRASS 1.0<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Hence sub-major releases might be the way to go.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Markus<div class="yqt8834637091" id="yqtfd03962"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">> [0] <a shape="rect" href="https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/RFC/7_LanguageStandardsSupport" target="_blank">https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/RFC/7_LanguageStandardsSupport</a><br clear="none"></div></div></div>            </div>                </div>