<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>yjftsjthsd-h</author><text>I mean, PyPy is over a decade old now, and micropython is a mere 7 years old. What&amp;#x27;s another fork? If anything, I strongly prefer languages that have more than one implementation.</text><parent_chain><item><author>mvanveen</author><text>Just came in here briefly to opine that there is a very real risk of fork if the Python core community does not at least offer a viable alternative expediently.&lt;p&gt;The economic pressures surrounding the benefits of gross’s changes will likely influence this more than any tears shed over subtle backwards incompatibility.&lt;p&gt;I believe it was Dropbox that famously released their own private internal Python  build a while back and included some concurrency patches.&lt;p&gt;Many teams might go the route of working from Sam Gross’ work and if we see subtle changes in underlying runtime concurrency semantics or something else backwards incompatible that’s it- either that adoption will roll downhill to a new standard or Python core will have to answer with a suitable GIL-less alternative.&lt;p&gt;I for one do not want to think about “ANSI Python” runtimes or give the MSFTs etc of the world an opening to divide the user base.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Notes from the Meeting on Python GIL Removal Between Python Core and Sam Gross</title><url>https://lukasz.langa.pl/5d044f91-49c1-4170-aed1-62b6763e6ad0/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>qwerty456127</author><text>Isn&amp;#x27;t there enough Python forks&amp;#x2F;implementations already? Is it reasonable to expect a new one to become more popular than those we already have?</text><parent_chain><item><author>mvanveen</author><text>Just came in here briefly to opine that there is a very real risk of fork if the Python core community does not at least offer a viable alternative expediently.&lt;p&gt;The economic pressures surrounding the benefits of gross’s changes will likely influence this more than any tears shed over subtle backwards incompatibility.&lt;p&gt;I believe it was Dropbox that famously released their own private internal Python  build a while back and included some concurrency patches.&lt;p&gt;Many teams might go the route of working from Sam Gross’ work and if we see subtle changes in underlying runtime concurrency semantics or something else backwards incompatible that’s it- either that adoption will roll downhill to a new standard or Python core will have to answer with a suitable GIL-less alternative.&lt;p&gt;I for one do not want to think about “ANSI Python” runtimes or give the MSFTs etc of the world an opening to divide the user base.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Notes from the Meeting on Python GIL Removal Between Python Core and Sam Gross</title><url>https://lukasz.langa.pl/5d044f91-49c1-4170-aed1-62b6763e6ad0/</url></story>