On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:21 AM Raphaël Gomès <raphael.go...@octobus.net> wrote:
> > On 10/14/19 7:08 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > > I support marking the code base as stable with Python 3 in the upcoming > few weeks - at least for non-Windows. > > If we're serious about this, we all need to be running Mercurial with > Python 3 locally and fixing bugs. I tried installing a Python 3 Mercurial a > few days ago and I encountered enough tracebacks to cause me to revert. > Those include https://bz.mercurial-scm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6196 and an > issue with evolve/obsmarkers that can be reproduced by `hg push` to > hg-committed. I think we should land a patch to Makefile that changes > https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/hg/file/649a9601b9e2/Makefile#l8 to > `python3` to force the issue. We can revert that before tagging 5.2 if we > want to do a separate release that is Python 3 primary (there was talk of > doing a 2.7 5.2 then doing a 5.2.1 or a 5.3 a week or two later that is > Python 3 native). > > I think this is the safer approach, regardless of progress made. > > We also still have a handful of test failures on Python 3. See > https://ci.hg.gregoryszorc.com/. (CI is broken with Python 3.5 for some > reason. I'll look into it.) > > Python 3 on Windows has a ton of test failures. ~120 I believe. I suspect > a lot of them are the same underlying issues. I almost have my CI system > working with Windows. But we'll certainly need a bit of effort on Windows > before we can consider Python 3 stable there. At this time, Python 3 on > Windows seems to be at risk because of the volume of issues. > > Other major blockers to Python 3 are packaging work. I'm the de facto > maintainer of the Windows packages and will write those patches. But my > priorities are standing up Windows CI because I think having visibility > into the test failures is more important because what good is Python 3 > packages if Mercurial isn't usable :) I could also help with non-Windows > packaging if it is needed. > > I would also propose we reinstate the @ code freeze for this release so we > can all focus on Python 3 and quality of life improvements for the release. > I don't think we'll put out a quality Python 3 release if we're distracted > by feature work on @. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "@ code freeze", can you elaborate? > Until the past ~1 year, the policy was to have a code freeze the 2 weeks before a major release. Only patches for the stable branch / upcoming release would be accepted. We did not actively work on the @ bookmark / default branch during this freeze. The idea was that by pausing feature development we would focus on putting out a higher quality release. We changed the policy recently and now it is acceptable to send patches for @/default in the ~2 weeks before a major release. > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 9:30 AM Pulkit Goyal <7895pul...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hey everyone, >> >> I hope you are doing well. >> >> We released 5.0 as beta release for Python 3 support and much has >> improved since than. Evolve extension recently started supporting >> Python 3. There are still few tests failing which are minor. >> >> We are planning to mark the upcoming release i.e. 5.2 as stable >> release for py3 support (except Windows). If we agree on that, we also >> plan to accept py3 related fixes on stable branch during upcoming >> feature freeze. >> >> It will be the best time to install hg on Python 3 and start testing. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Thanks and regards >> Pulkit >> > > _______________________________________________ > Mercurial-devel mailing > listMercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.orghttps://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel > >
_______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel