Re: [PROPOSAL] GNOME Goal for 3.8: No more Python 2
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: As per earlier discussions, I am proposing that we target GNOME 3.8 as our first all Python 3 release. Total lack of responses + 3.8 is far away: IMO ok. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [PROPOSAL] GNOME Goal for 3.8: No more Python 2
On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 09:23 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: As per earlier discussions, I am proposing that we target GNOME 3.8 as our first all Python 3 release. Total lack of responses + 3.8 is far away: IMO ok. Most likely because people don't know what's required. What's the contingency plan? Will we be able to ship 2 version of Python, 2 versions of the bindings and have old and new apps work as expected? What's needed for plugins? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [PROPOSAL] GNOME Goal for 3.8: No more Python 2
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 10:04:36AM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 09:23 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: As per earlier discussions, I am proposing that we target GNOME 3.8 as our first all Python 3 release. Total lack of responses + 3.8 is far away: IMO ok. Most likely because people don't know what's required. What's the contingency plan? Will we be able to ship 2 version of Python, 2 versions of the bindings and have old and new apps work as expected? What's needed for plugins? I asked at Mageia at they basically wondered why I was asking for it. Meaning: if GNOME only supports Python 3, then it just means a Python 3 dependency for various GNOME things. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [PROPOSAL] GNOME Goal for 3.8: No more Python 2
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 09:23 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: As per earlier discussions, I am proposing that we target GNOME 3.8 as our first all Python 3 release. Total lack of responses + 3.8 is far away: IMO ok. Most likely because people don't know what's required. What's the contingency plan? Will we be able to ship 2 version of Python, 2 versions of the bindings and have old and new apps work as expected? What's needed for plugins? If we start to convert modules, but don't complete, then python3 will be forced onto live cds, in addition to python2. Looking at the python3 and python3-libs packages here, that looks to be on the order of 25-30M. Not the end of the world, but some extra space to save somewhere else. The bigger issue is probably with support libraries and plugins; it will get more messy than it already is. Eg: rpm -qi pygobject2 ... The pygobject2 package provides a convenient wrapper for the GObject library for use in Python programs. rpm -qi pygobject3 ... The pygobject3 package provides a convenient wrapper for the GObject library for use in Python programs. Yet, both depend on python2.7 ??? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [PROPOSAL] GNOME Goal for 3.8: No more Python 2
On 07/03/2012 05:04 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 09:23 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: As per earlier discussions, I am proposing that we target GNOME 3.8 as our first all Python 3 release. Total lack of responses + 3.8 is far away: IMO ok. Most likely because people don't know what's required. What's the contingency plan? Will we be able to ship 2 version of Python, 2 versions of the bindings and have old and new apps work as expected? What's needed for plugins? Speaking as someone who did the Python 3 conversion for both Orca and Accerciser (code review pending), what I learned in the process is that there are many things which are both Python 2 and Python 3 compatible. In fact, the bulk of the changes are because quite a bit got backported into Python 2. Mind you, those things which did get backported are definitely in Python 2.7, might or might not be in Python 2.6, probably are not in 2.5 Thus if everyone can start with the changes which are both Python 2.7 and Python 3 compatible, our contingency plan could be a minimum required version of Python 2.7. Take care. --joanie ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [PROPOSAL] GNOME Goal for 3.8: No more Python 2
On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 10:13 -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: On 07/03/2012 05:04 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 09:23 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: As per earlier discussions, I am proposing that we target GNOME 3.8 as our first all Python 3 release. Total lack of responses + 3.8 is far away: IMO ok. Most likely because people don't know what's required. What's the contingency plan? Will we be able to ship 2 version of Python, 2 versions of the bindings and have old and new apps work as expected? What's needed for plugins? Speaking as someone who did the Python 3 conversion for both Orca and Accerciser (code review pending), what I learned in the process is that there are many things which are both Python 2 and Python 3 compatible. In fact, the bulk of the changes are because quite a bit got backported into Python 2. Mind you, those things which did get backported are definitely in Python 2.7, might or might not be in Python 2.6, probably are not in 2.5 Thus if everyone can start with the changes which are both Python 2.7 and Python 3 compatible, our contingency plan could be a minimum required version of Python 2.7. FWIW, I've found this library to be extremely helpful when maintaining .py code for the common subset of the 2.x and 3.* dialects: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/six/ It may be worth thinking about blessing this as a dependency. Hope this is helpful Dave ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [PROPOSAL] GNOME Goal for 3.8: No more Python 2
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 10:13 -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: On 07/03/2012 05:04 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 09:23 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: As per earlier discussions, I am proposing that we target GNOME 3.8 as our first all Python 3 release. Total lack of responses + 3.8 is far away: IMO ok. Most likely because people don't know what's required. What's the contingency plan? Will we be able to ship 2 version of Python, 2 versions of the bindings and have old and new apps work as expected? What's needed for plugins? Speaking as someone who did the Python 3 conversion for both Orca and Accerciser (code review pending), what I learned in the process is that there are many things which are both Python 2 and Python 3 compatible. In fact, the bulk of the changes are because quite a bit got backported into Python 2. Mind you, those things which did get backported are definitely in Python 2.7, might or might not be in Python 2.6, probably are not in 2.5 Thus if everyone can start with the changes which are both Python 2.7 and Python 3 compatible, our contingency plan could be a minimum required version of Python 2.7. FWIW, I've found this library to be extremely helpful when maintaining .py code for the common subset of the 2.x and 3.* dialects: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/six/ It may be worth thinking about blessing this as a dependency. I'm not the biggest fan of writing polyglots, which is what I see in a codebase that runs on both Python 2 and Python 3. To me, either we endorse Python 3 and drop Python 2 entirely, or we properly support Python 3 with 2to3 and a set of custom fixers, if necessary. 2to3 is much better than it was in the 3.0 days. Hope this is helpful Dave ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Jasper ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: taking features away (compact view removed from Nautilus)
Allan Day wrote on 02/07/12 09:38: ... Jon has been doing some fantastic work on Nautilus recently. It was getting very little - if any - developer attention and he has stepped up to make dramatic improvements, including addressing long-standing complaints. I'm really excited about the next release of Nautilus thanks to his work; instead of having no movement whatsoever, we are going to have lots of great improvements to talk about. ... You are confusing movement with improvements. -- mpt ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
