On Wed, May 31, 2017, at 07:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 09:47:37AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Monty Taylor's message of 2017-05-31 07:34:03 -0500: > > > On 05/31/2017 06:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 06:37:02AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I am not aware of anyone using pypy, and there are other valid working > > > >> alternatives. I would much rather just drop support for it than redo > > > >> our > > > >> crypto functions again. > > > >> > > > > > > > This question came up recently for the Oslo libraries, and I think we > > also agreed that pypy support was not being actively maintained. > > > > Doug > > > > Thanks Doug. If oslo does not support pypy, then I think that makes the > decision for me. I will put up a patch to get rid of that job and stop > wasting infra resources on it.
Just a couple things (I don't think it changes the decision made). Cryptography does at least claim to support PyPy (see https://pypi.python.org/pypi/cryptography/ trove identifiers), so possibly a bug on their end that should get filed? Also, our user clients should probably run under as many interpreters as possible to make life easier for end users; however, they currently depend on oslo and if oslo doesn't support pypy then likely not reasonable to do in user clients. Clark __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev