Repository navigation
Python 3.14 is not accepted in Branches v20.x, v22.x & v24.x #60874
Description
Activity
I wasn't really sure whether this should be reported as an issue, which is why I just wrote it as a comment in #60869
If you think it would be helpful I can write up steps to reproduce using Fedora 43, which has Python 3.14 as default. It is however simple to install other versions, such as Python 3.13 on Fedora - see https://developer.fedoraproject.org/tech/languages/python/multiple-pythons.html - so a workaround is available in this case.
The usual workaround is to bypass
configureand run insteadpython3 configure.py(orpython3.14 configure.py) which avoids any version sniffing. However as Python 3.14 becomes more commonplace, I think at least the more recent Node.js release lines ought to be able to autodetect it.Reacted by Mike McCreadyShould we just backport #59983?
I backported #59983 to the
v24.x-stagingbranch locally and then successfully built Node.js on a Fedora 43 system with the default Python 3.14 installed.I would offer to submit this as a PR, however I would wait until after the security release to avoid complications. Does this make sense or would you prefer to handle the backporting yourself?
It's alright if you open it now, I would recommend rebasing on top of
v24.xto not be affected by the security release.It's alright if you open it now, I would recommend rebasing on top of
v24.xto not be affected by the security release.Did I understand you correctly, that I should cherry-pick into the
v24.xbranch and then the PR should also target thev24.xbranch?(I was so far just following the instructions in How to backport a pull request to a release line which describes using the corresponding
vN.x-stagingbranch.)It may be simpler just to wait the 2 or 3 days until after the security release, so I can just follow standard process, bearing in mind also that this would be my first backporting PR.
Backport PRs should always target the staging branch (i.e.
v24.x-staging, which is always ahead ofv24.x). My recommendation is to rebase the backport on top of the tip ofv24.xbut still tarhetv24.x-staging. Obviously timing is up to you, do as you see fit.To avoid any additional complications I'll wait until after the release.
I don't see the backport as an urgent need since mainstream Linux such as Debian and Ubuntu are still on Python 3.12 / 3.13 as default. Although Fedora has Python 3.14 as default, it offers easy installation for earlier versions. On Windows it's also easy to install Python 3.13 as well, even though it's no longer Python's default.
So this is more just covering bases for future months and years.
I've now submitted #61370 for v24.x
I would also offer to prepare the backports for v20.x and v22.x. I would wait first for the successful acceptance of the v24.x backport #61370 before opening any other new PR though.
I would also offer to prepare the backports for v20.x and v22.x
Unless the commit that will land on v24.x does not apply on the other lines, we don't need backport PRs, a releaser or backporter can simply cherry-pick it; in fact it's less work for everyone if we skip the backport PR, so that would be my preference.
Unless the commit that will land on v24.x does not apply on the other lines, we don't need backport PRs, a releaser or backporter can simply cherry-pick it; in fact it's less work for everyone if we skip the backport PR, so that would be my preference.
Attempting to backport from v24.x-staging to v22.x-staging requires manual resolution of merge conflicts in
android-configureandconfiguredue to v22.x allowing Python 3.8 which v24.x does not allow.
The conflicts aren't difficult to resolve. Would this be a task typically done by a backporter or would it require a separate backport PR?
PR #58752 (dfcb824), which updated tools/configure.d/nodedownload.py for Python 3.14 compatibility, was backported to
not to the v20.x branch, so that would be a blocker to backporting #59983 to v20.x.
Given the impending EOL of Node.js 20 in April 2026, and the limited advantage of making this branch compatible with Python 3.14, I suggest to drop it as a target for this issue.
Reacted by Richard Lau- added 3 commits that reference this issue
on Feb 3, 2026 - added 2 commits that reference this issue
on Mar 2, 2026 I believe that this issue can now be closed.
I briefly tested in Fedora 43 with only the default Python 3.14.3 installed, executing simply:
./configure
Branch Result 20.x pass 22.x pass 24.x pass 25.x pass main pass Reacted by Richard Lau
Originally posted by @MikeMcC399 in #60869
cc @nodejs/releasers @nodejs/lts
(Disregard the Visual Studio 2022 bit, that's irrelevant for the Python issue. )
#59983 was marked
dont-land-*for 25.x, 24.x, 22.x and 20.x but I think we do want theconfigurechanges on the earlier release lines (provided no compatibility breakage with Python 3.14). I don't think we want theallow-prereleaseschange to the workflows (maybe that was the reason for thedont-land-*labels?).