On 11. 03. 22 19:30, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 1:26 AM Petr Viktorin <encu...@gmail.com
<mailto:encu...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 11. 03. 22 0:35, Brett Cannon wrote:
> I brought this up on python-dev at
>
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-...@python.org/thread/ZPBSHENP3V7KHNPYWE6BEQD5ASES2NLV/
<https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-...@python.org/thread/ZPBSHENP3V7KHNPYWE6BEQD5ASES2NLV/>
>
<https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-...@python.org/thread/ZPBSHENP3V7KHNPYWE6BEQD5ASES2NLV/
<https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-...@python.org/thread/ZPBSHENP3V7KHNPYWE6BEQD5ASES2NLV/>>
> , and the feedback seemed supportive. As such, I am bringing a
draft of
> what I'm thinking will go into PEP 11 with a bunch of `XXX`
placeholders
> for people to help me fill in to see how this will look overall.
>
> For any platform(s) you support, please reply with any relevant
details
> that should be added to the relevant tables below. Once I have these
> details I will loop back with the proposed update to PEP 11 and make
> sure everyone is still on board with the proposal.
>
> =====
> Tiers
> =====
>
> Tier 1
> ======
>
> - `Test suite failures
>
<https://github.com/python/cpython/actions/workflows/build.yml?query=branch%3Amain+is%3Acompleted
<https://github.com/python/cpython/actions/workflows/build.yml?query=branch%3Amain+is%3Acompleted>
>
<https://github.com/python/cpython/actions/workflows/build.yml?query=branch%3Amain+is%3Acompleted
<https://github.com/python/cpython/actions/workflows/build.yml?query=branch%3Amain+is%3Acompleted>>>`__
> block releases.
> - Changes which would break the ``main`` branch are not allowed
to be
> merged;
> any breakage may be reverted immediately.
> - All core developers are responsible to keep these platforms
working.
What does this mean?
I can not merge a change if it doesn't pass macOS CI, but I don't
have a
macOS system, so I can't really diagnose and fix macOS bugs.
Do you merge PRs today that don't pass CI on macOS?
> - Promotion of this tier requires consensus/SC approval.
>
> =================== =====
> Target Triple Notes
> =================== =====
> i686-windows-msvc
What's the supported version of Windows?
> x86_64-windows-msvc
> x86_64-apple-darwin macOS 11
> x86_64-linux-gnu glibc 2.31 |ubuntu-20_01|_
Would it be better to say “whatever GitHub Actions has” in the
long-term
docs, and put the specific version in the docs rather than in the PEP?
Perhaps; I was tempted to do that, but Christian requested the triples.
The triples are fine, but the "glibc 2.31" is too specific. Especially
in the Tier 2 list.
[...]> All other platforms
> ===================
>
> - Only code which either supports a higher-tier platform or is a
general
> improvement may be checked in.
I'm worried about going from this to tier 3.
How do you get to a platform's buildbot being stable if you can't merge
code for it?
You could develop code outside of the CPython repo until the platform is
ready to be supported.
Would you propose to drop the Buildbot requirement for tier 3 or
introduce a tier 4?
I think the other thread in the conversation makes this moot, but I'd
drop the Buildbot requirement for tier 3. It's enough that there's a
core dev interested in bringing a platform like WASM or Android up to speed.
_______________________________________________
python-committers mailing list -- python-committers@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-committers-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-committers.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-committers@python.org/message/YJKH5BNRXCSWPKLBEAFDBHZU4SACNNE4/
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
