Skip to content

Conversation

@raul5660
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@jekyc jekyc mentioned this pull request Jun 23, 2015
@jekyc
Copy link
Owner

jekyc commented Jun 23, 2015

Hi raul5660,

Thanks for the pull request and the work put into it.
I've made a general comment in issue #12. In it, I describe that I don't think creating completely separate classes for the python 2 support is easily maintained. I haven't come up with a better solution myself, but until we find a more ideal solution, I'd be glad to link to your fork in both wig and the readme. Would this be temporary "solution" be something you'd be interested in ?

@james-see
Copy link

Can this issue be closed now? Python 3 usage is widespread and there is no reason to maintain a version for 2.x. IMO.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants