I assume the decision to change the python executable name from 'python' to 'python3' for the new version was because the new version was not backwards compatible.Looking back on it -- was it the right decision, to break backwards-compatibility?And once that decision was made, was it right to effectively rename python for the new version the right decision?I say 'right' in terms of 'the overall health of the language and its ecosystem' -- assuming you wanted it to do well.I would guess it is a 'no' from most people not directly working on python, but very curious to know.I only know from afar that it seemed like maybe it was a catastrophe for the ecosystem, at least in terms of anguish and (short-term?) pain it caused.I was doing some python at the time and rewrite to 3 and it was a disaster, and caused me unicode-oriented problems forever, but I would usually/generally be ok with doing some painful things for the future overall health of the ecosystem.I'm looking at doing another project now and I'm looking at some 'python3' demos and thinking...there is at least one thing I hate about every language/stack that I'm contemplating using.I now Guido had a recent article saying something about 'No python4 prob'.And, why did python decide to break backwards-compatibility, but seemingly not most other mainstream high-level languages?