There's a reason the python 2.x line is 'patch only' by the developers.
Python 3 made fundamental changes to underlying string operations internally for UFT16, which you can easily argue, was a huge mistake, but there you go.
You can't just 'patch python3 support' in. You literally have to rip out anything that uses char * in the code base and replace it with a unicode supported alternative, which is both more complex, and breaks python 2 backwards compatibility.
Pypy is very clever in how they handle this through rpython, which is why they can kind of support both; but randomly dropping cpython 2.x code into the project is completely not forward looking.
I'd be happy with: "We never intend to support python 3, sorry".
If that's the path you want to walk for all the complicated reasons you choose it, fair enough.
There's a reason the python 2.x line is 'patch only' by the developers.
Python 3 made fundamental changes to underlying string operations internally for UFT16, which you can easily argue, was a huge mistake, but there you go.
You can't just 'patch python3 support' in. You literally have to rip out anything that uses char * in the code base and replace it with a unicode supported alternative, which is both more complex, and breaks python 2 backwards compatibility.
Pypy is very clever in how they handle this through rpython, which is why they can kind of support both; but randomly dropping cpython 2.x code into the project is completely not forward looking.
I'd be happy with: "We never intend to support python 3, sorry".
If that's the path you want to walk for all the complicated reasons you choose it, fair enough.