Updated "Status of Python versions" page

[nedbat]

This includes changes by me and @encukou. Suggestions welcome.

How would you describe the difference between "feature fixes" and "bug fixes"?

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-devguide--1531.org.readthedocs.build/versions/

[ned-deily]

The prerelease phase description LGTM, thanks.

[hugovk]

Mostly nits.

[encukou]

Here's the promised cleanup: nedbat#1

[ezio-melotti]

I find the page structure a bit confusing, since it has two charts and two tables, with some level of overlapping between them but otherwise no further symmetry:

• first there's the chart with 2.7 + 3.6-3.14
• then there's a table with 3.9-3.14 (supported versions)
• then there's another table with 2.6-2.7 + 3.0-3.8 (unsupported versions)
• then there's the full chart with 2.6-2.7 + 3.0-3.14 (all versions)

In particular:

• Is there a reason why the first chart includes 2.7/3.6-3.8 even though they are unsupported? Perhaps this could become the chart of supported versions only?
• It might be less confusing if both tables were under the same header ("Version support"?), with either a <caption> or a colspanning <th> on top of each table for "supported"/"unsupported" (or even joined together, with the colspanning <th>s)

This can also be addressed in a separate PR if you prefer.

[encukou]

This structure is deliberate. It keeps the tables together, and the least-useful info (the full chart) at the end, and a heavy distinction between active and EOL branches.

Perhaps this could become the chart of supported versions only?

When we get tired of telling people that 2.7 is EOL, we set the special_py27 argument to False :)
That'll still show versions that went EOL during an active branch's lifetime. That should (for 3.8+) match the recommended deprecation period per PEP 387.

[ezio-melotti]

It keeps the tables together

This is good, since they complement each other -- that's why I suggested putting them in the same subsection too.

the least-useful info (the full chart) at the end, and a heavy distinction between active and EOL branches.

Removing EOL branches from the first chart would make the distinction even clearer IMHO.

When we get tired of telling people that 2.7 is EOL

I don't think we need it in the first chart for that -- the fact that it's not even included should give them a hint, and if that's not enough they can find 2.7 in the table and in the full chart.

[nedbat]

I think everything has been addressed.

[hugovk]

Thanks all!

[hugovk]

Unrevert

Suggested change

	<!-- bugfix/security blobs need to be split between the two phases.
	Draw the rectangle with two path elements instead.
	Thanks Claude.ai for the initial conversion.
	<!-- Bugfix/security blobs need to be split between the two phases.
	Draw the rectangle with two path elements instead.

[encukou]

Claude served its role -- it allowed Ned to get started -- even if its code was messy and basically none of it remains.

[encukou]

Thank you for pushing this through, Ned!