Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But still, you can't honestly expect me to recommend 3.0 until someone has gotten at least a basic skeleton of Twisted up and running under it :). My own attempts to do so have failed miserably, to the point where I can't even produce a useful bug report without a lot more work. How about an issue in the Python tracker---or the Twisted one, with a xref from the Python tracker to the Twisted tracker where the work will be done---that says Twisted wants to be ported but we don't have enough developers, please help? Maybe with some encouraging statement about how you can provide X amount of advice. In general, maybe there should be some sort of (semi-)formal process for proposing ports of libraries and coordinating work on them. Even just a focal point for where to make such requests, and a way to saerch for them so you can find others with similar interests. I don't think there's anything about the 3.0 language which couldn't be supported in a VM that understood both 2 and 3. Strings vs. bytes.shudder It can't do both 2-style bytes are text and 3-style no way are bytes text simultaneously AFAICS. I also don't think 3.0 is perfect, and five years on, there will be a temptation to make more just this once incompatible changes. Of course, you've promised these changes won't be made, and *this* set of design mistakes will be with us forever. For values of forever approximating ten years.wink It would be nice if there were a way for evolution to continue without another reboot of the world. Stephen J. Gould says not.wink I think Java is a very different case from Python. It is the product of a language evolution that goes back to the early 1970s or so, and the standardization effort was carefully shepherded by a powerful company which provided resources to ensure that things went its way. For that reason, I think it's a remarkable compliment to Python and to Python 3 in particular that you consider Java an appropriate standard of comparison for Python. There's also the danger of stasis. I think Lisp will never die, and Common Lisp has done a good job of avoiding reboots. But for precisely that reason there continues to be a lively evolution of seriously incompatible dialects, both Lisp-1 (Scheme) and Lisp-2. I see Python 3 as an attempt to bridle and ride this tiger, without turning the rope into a noose and strangling the beast. If they're that easily convinced that Java is better they probably were a lost cause anyway, so I won't mourn their departure too much. I really believe that *all* new users are fickle, if they don't have a mandate as to what they need to be learning. Personally, I learned Python because of a memory leak in Swing. Sure, but what Guido is saying, I think, is that as long as prominent Python developers don't announce its funeral, the other things we could do to encourage them are going to get lost in the noise of inherent fickleness. Which isn't just random, it depends on things like availability of just the right library for one's app, etc. But there are too many of those to do them all, or even just to list them up and try to prioritize them objectively---might as well be random. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Bill Janssen wrote: Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Allow me to paraphrase glyph (with whom I'm in complete agreement, for what it's worth): many newbies will be disappointed by Python if they start with Python 3.0 and discover that most of the cool possibilities they had heard about are 'being worked on' and not quite ready. I don't doubt that 3.0 will be easier for the new programmer to learn, but I do not believe the average Oh, I heard about Python, let's learn it person should be pointed to 3.0 right now. They should be encouraged to learn 2.6 -- or even 2.5. I think that's right. I was asked this question today, and it comes up (to me) fairly often at PARC. I usually suggest using the Python version that's standard for the user's platform, if they use OS X or Linux (and most do), which is typically 2.5 (for OS X Leopard), and 2.4 (for Linux -- may be out of date). For Linux, it depends on the distro. I think Ubuntu has been on 2.5 since 7.04 or so. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 02:47, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the mean time, I don't mind if people learn 3.0 first and 2.6 second. It's probably easier that way than the other way around. :-) It may be easier in a vacuum -- although I don't think it is. 3.0 is more logical than 2.x, and I don't think it's easier to learn about the better way first, and then realize that you have to use some archaic form later. In fact, we had someone on #python just last week who had learned Python from a 2.6 tutorial, then found out he had to use 2.5, and he was actually tripping over some 2.6-only features he'd been taught. When he learned he had to go back and relearn and fix them by hand, his actual words were if thats the case, I'm gonna be forced to use another language. I hope that isn't a typical example of such a case, but I can partly understand the sentiment. But even if it's true, people don't learn in a vacuum. Almost everybody else will be thinking of 3.0 in terms of 'changes since 2.x', tools such as 2to3 are oriented that way, and explanations on bits and pieces of Python available to be googled are by and large about 2.x, not 3.0. Right now, it's just much easier to go from 2.x to 3.0 than the other way 'round. -- Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread! ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 2:12 AM, Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 02:47, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the mean time, I don't mind if people learn 3.0 first and 2.6 second. It's probably easier that way than the other way around. :-) It may be easier in a vacuum -- although I don't think it is. 3.0 is more logical than 2.x, and I don't think it's easier to learn about the better way first, and then realize that you have to use some archaic form later. True, though (at least when writing new 2.x code) it's often not needed to use the archaic forms. E.g. you don't have to use backticks or __cmp__ or string exceptions. And if you can live with 2.6 it gets even better (e.g. relative import, except ... as ...). In fact, we had someone on #python just last week who had learned Python from a 2.6 tutorial, then found out he had to use 2.5, and he was actually tripping over some 2.6-only features he'd been taught. When he learned he had to go back and relearn and fix them by hand, his actual words were if thats the case, I'm gonna be forced to use another language. I hope that isn't a typical example of such a case, but I can partly understand the sentiment. You can't prevent this kind of thing happening occasionally. I don't generally lie awake over it -- I don't expect a massive exodus. I think some people like to say this kind of thing (especially publicly) because they expect us to be insecure about Python adoption and worried about the competition. Don't fall for the troll bait! When they go home they'll realize that learning Ruby or Java is a lot more work than learning the differences between Python 2.5 and 2.6. Or they'll learn one of those and find that it's not all roses their either. (Ruby is also going through a language transition, and the choice of which version of Java to learn isn't that easy either, despite the strict backwards compatibility -- you can choose to use a somewhat awkward older version, or use the latest and find it's not supported on the next platform you're porting to.) But even if it's true, people don't learn in a vacuum. Almost everybody else will be thinking of 3.0 in terms of 'changes since 2.x', tools such as 2to3 are oriented that way, and explanations on bits and pieces of Python available to be googled are by and large about 2.x, not 3.0. Right now, it's just much easier to go from 2.x to 3.0 than the other way 'round. True, but we should work on fixing this rather than giving up. What happened to the 3to2 project? Wasn't someone planning to write a 3.0 to 2.6 (or 2.5?) converter using the same technology in 2to3? We probably need two different marketing/PR streams: one aimed at *existing* Python users (reaffirming we will be supporting 2.x fully for many years to come), another at *new* users (suggesting that now is a better time than ever to learn Python, with 3.0 available and new packages being ported to it all the time). -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The best thing for 3.0 adoption would be a 3.0 welcoming committee. A group of hackers wandering from one popular open source library to another, writing patches for 3.x compatibility issues. There must be lots of people who care about 3.x adoption, and this is probably the most effective way they can reach that goal. Each time I am going to fix a 3.0 compatibility issue, I have a choice: I can either make Twisted itself better (add features, fix bugs), or I can keep Twisted exactly the same but do lots of work so it will work on 3.0. It seems pretty clear to me that, to the extent that I have time for Twisted, fixing bugs in the HTTP implementation would be a better deal than puzzling through a megabyte of diffs generated by 2to3, trying to understand where it went wrong, and how. This doesn't mean I'm sitting on my hands. It just means I have better things to be doing with my hands. (To be precise, 1054 better things to do, re: Twisted. Add in the Divmod projects and it's more like 3000.) Of course the distant threat of an unmaintained 2.x series is enough to motivate me to push a *little* in this direction, but it doesn't make me happy about it. I think this is exactly what the marketing effort around 3.0 needs to be doing: making a positive case for library and application authors to spend time to update to 3.x. This is a lot of work, and many (I might even say most) of us need a lot of cajoling. Free patches are a good incentive :). This is a really good idea. I hope and expect that the information and tools available for porting to 3.0 will dramatically improve over the next half year or so (hopefully the situation is a lot less gloomy already by the time we meet again at PyCon). The porting list that was just created also sounds like a step in the right direction. I do think that in many cases *some* support from the regular maintainers of a library would be needed -- for example if you (in particular) were to express a negative attitude towards porting Twisted to 3.0 (I'm not saying that you do, it's just a hypothetical that would apply to any BDFL for any sizable library) then this would discourage others from trying to contribute. OTOH if you made a branch available where you check in the results of running 2to3 over Twisted, with instructions for people to contribute fixes, that would be great -- at almost no cost to you! (Assuming you can get someone else to work on merging trunk improvements into that branch.) Remember the open source mantra -- reap the benefit of all those eyeballs! -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 10:12 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When he learned he had to go back and relearn and fix them by hand, his actual words were if thats the case, I'm gonna be forced to use another language. I hope that isn't a typical example of such a case, but I can partly understand the sentiment. This is an overreaction, but it's a very typical overreaction. It's difficult to recover from a negative first impression even if you have lots of opportunities; in the case of an anonymous user trying out Python, the user will often stop using it, without telling anyone, and never come back. There's no opportunity to recover. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:48 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10:12 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When he learned he had to go back and relearn and fix them by hand, his actual words were if thats the case, I'm gonna be forced to use another language. I hope that isn't a typical example of such a case, but I can partly understand the sentiment. This is an overreaction, but it's a very typical overreaction. It's difficult to recover from a negative first impression even if you have lots of opportunities; in the case of an anonymous user trying out Python, the user will often stop using it, without telling anyone, and never come back. There's no opportunity to recover. Sorry, but I really don't see it that dark. Either they weren't ready to learn a new language anyway, or they'll try something else, and find that the grass isn't actually that green on the other side of the fence either. In general I don't worry about losing one individual potential user; there are plenty of others. I'd be more worried if someone wrote a nasty blog rant or a Slashdot article after such an experience -- but there will always be lots of people pointing out the other side, so the negative effect of such blogs is usually neutralized quite well. The one overraction that would really worry me is if influential people inside the Python developer community were to start dissing Python 3.0 based on the response of someone in #python. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 06:03:55AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - On 01:47 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - In spite of Python being a programming language, there is a difference - between 'casual user of the language' and 'library developer'; 3.0 is - certainly a must for all actual library developers, and I'm sure most - of - them know about 3.0 by now. We're talking about first impressions for - people - without that knowledge. - - Well if most library developers already know 3.0 by now, I would hope - they aren't going to sit on their hands, and solve the issues at hand! - - The best thing for 3.0 adoption would be a 3.0 welcoming committee. A - group of hackers wandering from one popular open source library to - another, writing patches for 3.x compatibility issues. There must be - lots of people who care about 3.x adoption, and this is probably the - most effective way they can reach that goal. Does anyone smell a few GSoC projects? (And maybe GHOP if Google decides to run it again; no word yet.) --titus -- C. Titus Brown, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
As far as the original point of this thread, I started off just defending the cautionary text already present in the announcements and on the website. Since I'm not advocating any changes to that (the brief caveat on the download page is fine), we'll just have to agree to disagree on the abstractly appropriate audience for 3.0. I'll respond to some other points though: On 05:54 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5 Dec, 06:10 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's great to have specific marketing targeted towards library developers. I know we haven't done enough -- for example I promised a C extension porting guide which didn't materialize. :-( Well, get cracking, then! :) If you can't find it in your heart to recommend 3.0, can you at least keep that within your circle of library-producing friends? In another (longer) message, I already said this is what I'm doing. Assuming that we are all my library-producing friends here :). I am deliberately refraining from blogging about 3.0 until I have something nice to say. But still, you can't honestly expect me to recommend 3.0 until someone has gotten at least a basic skeleton of Twisted up and running under it :). My own attempts to do so have failed miserably, to the point where I can't even produce a useful bug report without a lot more work. Would you recommend a C compiler that couldn't build Python, or link with it? Whenever someone asks me which version to use, I alwasys respond with a question -- what do you want to use it for? In the longer term, I think that you should look at this as a symptom of a problem. If you learn Java, you learn the most recent version. If you need your software to work with an older version, you just pass a special option to the compiler. If you want your *old* software to work with a *new* version, it basically just does (at least, 99% of the time). I don't think there's anything about the 3.0 language which couldn't be supported in a VM that understood both 2 and 3. py3to2 seems at least a rough proof of concept of that idea, although it still has some issues. Library availability should be a separate concern from a clean source language. I also don't think 3.0 is perfect, and five years on, there will be a temptation to make more just this once incompatible changes. Of course, you've promised these changes won't be made, and *this* set of design mistakes will be with us forever. It would be nice if there were a way for evolution to continue without another reboot of the world. If they're that easily convinced that Java is better they probably were a lost cause anyway, so I won't mourn their departure too much. I really believe that *all* new users are fickle, if they don't have a mandate as to what they need to be learning. Personally, I learned Python because of a memory leak in Swing. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 06:16 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do think that in many cases *some* support from the regular maintainers of a library would be needed -- for example if you (in particular) were to express a negative attitude towards porting Twisted to 3.0 (I'm not saying that you do, it's just a hypothetical that would apply to any BDFL for any sizable library) then this would discourage others from trying to contribute. Of course. Grumpy as we are, we're preparing for the 3.0 migration, and have been for a while. There are tickets open in the tracker, a buildslave reporting 2.6's -3 warnings, and soon, apparently, a buildslave that will attempt to run the tests with 3.0, although getting anything but a traceback bootstrapping the testing tool is a ways off. My attitude in every public statement I've ever made about 3.0 has been that there is too much migration work for our tiny team to do, but we are very open to getting help from the community. OTOH if you made a branch available where you check in the results of running 2to3 over Twisted, with instructions for people to contribute fixes, that would be great -- at almost no cost to you! (Assuming you can get someone else to work on merging trunk improvements into that branch.) Remember the open source mantra -- reap the benefit of all those eyeballs! This isn't really the way our development process works on Twisted - we don't have enough developers to support more than one line of development. Modules and subsystems can be patched individually, and the whole idea with 2to3 is that source changes should remain compatible with 2.6 (and appropriate level of swaddling can paper over library changes back to 2.3) so those fixes can just go into trunk, right? Nevertheless the sentiment is the same. If someone desperately interested in getting Twisted to work on 3.0, there would be lots of work for them to do and a clear place for them to go do it. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also don't think 3.0 is perfect, and five years on, there will be a temptation to make more just this once incompatible changes. Of course, you've promised these changes won't be made, and *this* set of design mistakes will be with us forever. It would be nice if there were a way for evolution to continue without another reboot of the world. It would be nice indeed. But we (and any other language that's alive) will need to walk a careful line between evolving too slow and too fast. Hopefully we'll be able to evolve mostly through deprecation and eventual removal of misfeatures rather than through a series of hiccups like 3.0. But it will still be too slow for some and too fast for others. Since one of your favorite themes is that your team is too small, I would like to reuse that idea. If we had as many Python core developers as Sun and IBM have working on Java, we could most likely have introduced all Python 3.0 features gradually, with compiler flags and __future__ imports to support different versions. But despite being a bit bigger than Twisted, we're still severely constrained by resources. My estimation when we started was that it would be easier for the core team to maintain two separate versions over a long time, than to try and produce a single binary capable of running both versions of the language. (Maybe Jython and/or IronPython provide a better platform for doing that though.) Hopefully by the time Python 4000 rolls along, technology will be available to make the transition more smoothly. But we'll still have to break some eggs... -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course. Grumpy as we are, we're preparing for the 3.0 migration, and have been for a while. There are tickets open in the tracker, a buildslave reporting 2.6's -3 warnings, and soon, apparently, a buildslave that will attempt to run the tests with 3.0, although getting anything but a traceback bootstrapping the testing tool is a ways off. Thank you very much for this. My attitude in every public statement I've ever made about 3.0 has been that there is too much migration work for our tiny team to do, but we are very open to getting help from the community. If I were a Twisted user I wouldn't hesitate to help. Open source to the rescue! -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 08:51 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also don't think 3.0 is perfect, and five years on, there will be a temptation to make more just this once incompatible changes. Of course, you've promised these changes won't be made, and *this* set of design mistakes will be with us forever. It would be nice if there were a way for evolution to continue without another reboot of the world. Since one of your favorite themes is that your team is too small, I would like to reuse that idea. If we had as many Python core developers as Sun and IBM have working on Java, we could most likely have introduced all Python 3.0 features gradually, with compiler flags and __future__ imports to support different versions. But despite being a bit bigger than Twisted, we're still severely constrained by resources. Ah, the dangers of over-editing. I originally had a whole paragraph about how I understood that the Python dev team was also resource constrained, but I deleted it for brevity. Now you see why my posts are so long! :) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 22:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 01:47 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In spite of Python being a programming language, there is a difference between 'casual user of the language' and 'library developer'; 3.0 is certainly a must for all actual library developers, and I'm sure most of them know about 3.0 by now. We're talking about first impressions for people without that knowledge. Well if most library developers already know 3.0 by now, I would hope they aren't going to sit on their hands, and solve the issues at hand! The best thing for 3.0 adoption would be a 3.0 welcoming committee. A group of hackers wandering from one popular open source library to another, writing patches for 3.x compatibility issues. There must be lots of people who care about 3.x adoption, and this is probably the most effective way they can reach that goal. The welcoming committee has somewhat already started. Martin announced on python-porting that he ported psycopg2 himself and submitted the patch. Martin also mostly ported Django at the last PyCon. -Brett ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008, Guido van Rossum wrote: But I do *not* think it is a good idea to emphasize elsewhere that most people shouldn't use Python 3.0. Py3k will have a hard enough time gaining mindshare without the very developers who created it discouraging its use. If you can't find it in your heart to recommend 3.0, can you at least keep that within your circle of library-producing friends? Sorry, I don't think I can do that. It's difficult-to-impossible to leap straight from Python 2.2 or 2.3 to 3.0, and I think that most released Python software still ought to support versions going back that far. Unless someone plans to use Python only on machines where they can guarantee availability of 3.0, I think that sticking with 2.x is the prudent course. Then again, until the release of 3.0, I was still advocating the use of classic classes in the 2.x series, and I haven't yet decided whether I should change that stance now that there is a released version of Python where new-style classes are the default. I believe that it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if there were a large proportion of the Python community that discouraged the use of 3.0; I also believe it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if you (and other people) tell conservatives like me that we should keep our mouths shut. -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) * http://www.pythoncraft.com/ It is easier to optimize correct code than to correct optimized code. --Bill Harlan ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Aahz wrote: I believe that it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if there were a large proportion of the Python community that discouraged the use of 3.0; I also believe it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if you (and other people) tell conservatives like me that we should keep our mouths shut. I don't think being honest about the situation is going to hurt anything in the long run. There are lots of advantages to 3.0, but also plenty of good reasons to stick with 2.x as well. At this point in time, my own recommendation would be that if someone doesn't have time to do a proper evaluation of the situation (talking production development here, not learning for fun), then I would probably still point them at 2.5. That recommendation will probably change to 2.6 in a couple of months (since it usually takes a few months after a release for the rest of the Python ecosystem to catch up with a new 2.x release). If they have the time though, my recommendation would be for them to do their *own* evaluation, looking both at things that favour 3.0 like Unicode handling and general developer convenience, as well as the things that currently favour 2.x like IO speed and availability of 3rd party libraries. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Sorry, I don't think I can do that. It's difficult-to-impossible to leap straight from Python 2.2 or 2.3 to 3.0 My experience is different. That is very well possible (of course, I haven't heard in a long time of a project that needs to maintain compatibility with 2.2). Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aahz wrote: I believe that it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if there were a large proportion of the Python community that discouraged the use of 3.0; I also believe it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if you (and other people) tell conservatives like me that we should keep our mouths shut. I hope I am not perceived as telling you to keep your mouth shut. I am merely hoping that you will decide for yourself after having heard me out. I don't think being honest about the situation is going to hurt anything in the long run. There are lots of advantages to 3.0, but also plenty of good reasons to stick with 2.x as well. At this point in time, my own recommendation would be that if someone doesn't have time to do a proper evaluation of the situation (talking production development here, not learning for fun), then I would probably still point them at 2.5. That recommendation will probably change to 2.6 in a couple of months (since it usually takes a few months after a release for the rest of the Python ecosystem to catch up with a new 2.x release). If they have the time though, my recommendation would be for them to do their *own* evaluation, looking both at things that favour 3.0 like Unicode handling and general developer convenience, as well as the things that currently favour 2.x like IO speed and availability of 3rd party libraries. That sounds right. I just heard (via Martin) that PEP 3131 (Unicode letters in identifiers) is already a big hit in Japan. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Barry Warsaw schrieb: On Dec 4, 2008, at 6:21 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I can't find any docs built for Python 3.0 (not 3.1a0). The Windows installation has new 3.0 doc dated Dec 3, so it was built, just not posted correctly. That doesn't mean very much. I built it on my local machine. Anybody with subversion and python could do that; the documentation is in subversion. Whether or not it appears on the web site as part of the release process is an entirely different matter. It used to be that the doc maintainer (Fred Drake) was part of the release team and release process. I think Georg is complaining that he is release maintainer, but not part of the release process. I've asked Georg to update PEP 101 to make his role as Documentation Expert explicit. Unfortunately we only debug major releases once (or twice) every 18 months. But next time, we'll get that part right for sure! Done that now. Since release.py builds the docs all right, there's not much left for me to do except check that everything is ok. In the meantime, I'll make sure Georg is involved in point releases moving forward. That's good. Thanks! Georg -- Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less. Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final FFT
http://code.activestate.com/recipes/576550/ This recipe shows how to use gsl FFT with python 3. ctypes is really good! ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 22:05:05 -0800, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:40 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The default case, the case of the user without the wherewithal to understand the nuances of the distinction between 2.x and 3.x, is a user who should use 2.x. Not at all clear. If they're not sensitive to those nuances it's just as likely that they're a casual developer (e.g. a student just learning to program). Such users are unlikely to start using major 3rd party packages like Twisted or Django, which would be completely overwhelming to someone just learning. That seems like it would be right to me, but two or three times a month someone shows up in the Twisted IRC channel who is learning both Python and Twisted at the same time. So apparently there are a lot of people for whom this isn't overwhelming. Jean-Paul ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:35 AM, A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:29:31PM -0800, Raymond Hettinger wrote: Here's a bright idea. On the 3.0 release page, include a box listing which major third-party apps have been converted. Update it once every couple of weeks. That way, we're not explicitly That's an excellent idea. We could have a webpage, or start a topic-specific weblog for posting announcements. I've started a draft of a 3.0 FAQ in the wiki at http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python3000/FAQ. Once it's finished we can move it into the 3.0 release pages. Everyone please edit and improve it! Sometime ago I started a page on the wiki to collect reports of early migrations by the community: http://wiki.python.org/moin/Early2to3Migrations Maybe this would be relevant to point on the FAQ. --amk ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/eduardo.padoan%40gmail.com -- Eduardo de Oliveira Padoan http://djangopeople.net/edcrypt/ Distrust those in whom the desire to punish is strong. -- Goethe, Nietzsche, Dostoevsky ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Martin There is. There have been the following trove classifiers Martin defined for a few weeks now: Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 2 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 2.3 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 2.4 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 2.5 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 2.6 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 2.7 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 3 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 3.0 Martin Programming Language :: Python :: 3.1 Good. Now we just need to populate them. I take it the classifiers without minor numbers imply any known minor version (e.g., 2 == 2.3 and greater)? Skip ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 05:40:46AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For most users, especially new users who have yet to be impressed with Python's power, 2.x is much better. It's not like library support is one small check-box on the language's feature sheet: most of the attractive things about Python are libraries. Of course I am not free Here I agree, sort of. Newbies may not understand what they're giving up in terms of libraries. (The 'sort of' is because, having learned 3.0, learning the changes for 2.6 is certainly much easier than learning a first programming language is.) The third (albeit much less likely) option is that you're learning Python to learn to interact with a system that's scriptable in embedded Python, like Blender or Gimp. I don't think there's a single system of that variety which uses 3.0 yet, and these will likely be even slower to move than libraries. Let me note that if some application embeds Python for a specialized purpose, where the only modules imported are either user-written or part of the application, it seems much *easier* to move to Python 3 because the scripts don't use arbitrary third-party libraries. Python embedded in an e-mail MTA might use libraries for DNS or file I/O or databases and has to be cautious about versions; Python in Gimp probably doesn't, in practice. --amk ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Dec 4, 2008, at 7:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 02:35 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:29:31PM -0800, Raymond Hettinger wrote: Here's a bright idea. On the 3.0 release page, include a box listing which major third-party apps have been converted. Update it once every couple of weeks. That way, we're not explicitly That's an excellent idea. We could have a webpage, or start a topic-specific weblog for posting announcements. I've started a draft of a 3.0 FAQ in the wiki at http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python3000/FAQ. Once it's finished we can move it into the 3.0 release pages. Everyone please edit and improve it! It occurs to me that this specific idea (the box with the list of supported applications / libraries) should be implementable as a simple query against PyPI. I don't know if it actually is :), but it should be. In general it would be nice to know whether one's favorite tools were available for *any* new Python version. I agree with this. Plus it might act as an incentive for people to port libraries faster... Ted ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With all due respect, for me, library support and serious use are synonymous. Glyph, I cannot have a discussion with you if every single post of yours is longer than my combined daily output. Please spend some time writing shorter posts. I'm sure I'm not the only one here with a short attention span. :-) -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Dec 5, 2008, at 10:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good. Now we just need to populate them. I take it the classifiers without minor numbers imply any known minor version (e.g., 2 == 2.3 and greater)? This is an excellent question, Skip. There was already Programming Language :: Python, provided by many packages. I think version compatibility relationships meant by each of these classifiers should be made explicit, wherever it is that documentation for classifiers is provided. I don't recall having seen any such documentation; hopefully I just need to be hit by another clue. -Fred -- Fred Drake fdrake at acm.org ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: To be fair, if someone asked me specifically about educating non- programmer adults about programming, I would probably at least *mention* py3, if not recommend it outright. The improved consistency is worth a lot in an educational setting. (But, if one is educating children and interested in soliciting their genuine enthusiasm, whiz-bang graphics are really a must-have, not a negotiable extra.) As a non native English speaker I'm not sure if I understand correctly, what you mean with whiz-bang graphics. Nevertheless I'd like to point you to the new turtle graphics module (which is part of the standard librarys since 2.6). At least it was designed especially for use in the educational domain. Moreover the source-distribution also contains a bunch of some ten example scripts. Regards, Gregor ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 5-Dec-08, at 8:40 AM, A.M. Kuchling wrote: On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 05:40:46AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For most users, especially new users who have yet to be impressed with Python's power, 2.x is much better. It's not like library support is one small check-box on the language's feature sheet: most of the attractive things about Python are libraries. Of course I am not free Here I agree, sort of. Newbies may not understand what they're giving up in terms of libraries. (The 'sort of' is because, having learned 3.0, learning the changes for 2.6 is certainly much easier than learning a first programming language is.) For possible insight, here is a current discussion on the topic: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7hlra/ask_progit_ive_got_the_itch_to_learn_python_since/ (note that these would be programmers interested in learning python, not people trying to learn programming) -Mike ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gregor Lingl wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: To be fair, if someone asked me specifically about educating non- programmer adults about programming, I would probably at least *mention* py3, if not recommend it outright. The improved consistency is worth a lot in an educational setting. (But, if one is educating children and interested in soliciting their genuine enthusiasm, whiz-bang graphics are really a must-have, not a negotiable extra.) As a non native English speaker I'm not sure if I understand correctly, what you mean with whiz-bang graphics. Nevertheless I'd like to point you to the new turtle graphics module (which is part of the standard librarys since 2.6). At least it was designed especially for use in the educational domain. Moreover the source-distribution also contains a bunch of some ten example scripts. I'm pretty sure he that turtle graphics are not whiz-bang (in this century, at least). Begin able to do pygame-style OpenGL stuff would be whiz bang[1] in my book. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whizbang Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJOZPn+gerLs4ltQ4RAnE1AKCl+Z51tACSJLBmAOcp5q534Mx+2ACg1I28 re6gaV7AFEU0WS1yvUIiZS0= =4Pda -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Good. Now we just need to populate them. I take it the classifiers without minor numbers imply any known minor version (e.g., 2 == 2.3 and greater)? Perhaps. As usual, they mean what people use them for. I intended them to mean 2.x and 3.x, respectively, with no constraint on x (i.e. including possibly 2.0 and 2.1). In particular, presence of 2 and absence of 3 is meant to indicate I know that it won't work on Python 3. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 19:10, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With all due respect, for me, library support and serious use are synonymous. Glyph, I cannot have a discussion with you if every single post of yours is longer than my combined daily output. Please spend some time writing shorter posts. I'm sure I'm not the only one here with a short attention span. :-) Allow me to paraphrase glyph (with whom I'm in complete agreement, for what it's worth): many newbies will be disappointed by Python if they start with Python 3.0 and discover that most of the cool possibilities they had heard about are 'being worked on' and not quite ready. I don't doubt that 3.0 will be easier for the new programmer to learn, but I do not believe the average Oh, I heard about Python, let's learn it person should be pointed to 3.0 right now. They should be encouraged to learn 2.6 -- or even 2.5. In spite of Python being a programming language, there is a difference between 'casual user of the language' and 'library developer'; 3.0 is certainly a must for all actual library developers, and I'm sure most of them know about 3.0 by now. We're talking about first impressions for people without that knowledge. -- Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread! ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
There was already Programming Language :: Python, provided by many packages. I think version compatibility relationships meant by each of these classifiers should be made explicit, wherever it is that documentation for classifiers is provided. I don't recall having seen any such documentation; hopefully I just need to be hit by another clue. There is no documentation for classifiers whatsoever. I don't think nuances matter much, anyway. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 12:47:45 pm Guido van Rossum wrote: But I disagree that most of the cool possibilities they have heard about are necessarily third party libraries. Python's standard library has lots of stuff to offer. +1 on that. I've been using Python for a decade now, and the first third party library I've downloaded and used was Pyparsing a month or two ago. I'll be the first to admit that my programs tend to be on the small size, but they're useful to me. The lack of third party libraries to Python 3 is not necessarily a show-stopper. -- Steven ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Allow me to paraphrase glyph (with whom I'm in complete agreement, for what it's worth): many newbies will be disappointed by Python if they start with Python 3.0 and discover that most of the cool possibilities they had heard about are 'being worked on' and not quite ready. I don't doubt that 3.0 will be easier for the new programmer to learn, but I do not believe the average Oh, I heard about Python, let's learn it person should be pointed to 3.0 right now. They should be encouraged to learn 2.6 -- or even 2.5. I think that's right. I was asked this question today, and it comes up (to me) fairly often at PARC. I usually suggest using the Python version that's standard for the user's platform, if they use OS X or Linux (and most do), which is typically 2.5 (for OS X Leopard), and 2.4 (for Linux -- may be out of date). For Windows users, I suggest the latest release (2.6). Bill ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 5 Dec, 06:10 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With all due respect, for me, library support and serious use are synonymous. Glyph, I cannot have a discussion with you if every single post of yours is longer than my combined daily output. Please spend some time writing shorter posts. I'm sure I'm not the only one here with a short attention span. :-) I already spend a lot of time trying to remove extraneous details. The drafts of these messages are usually 3x as long :). So, trying to keep it short: Thomas paraphrased my point pretty well. The importance of libraries cannot be overemphasized. Maybe you're right and the stdlib is enough for a large audience, but I don't know that audience. Everyone I know who uses Python, uses it because of a library. In some cases, an equivalent library exists for another language, and Python wins because it has a nicer syntax. But, in no case does Python win where it *doesn't* have the library. I think that the marketing for py3 needs to target library vendors before targeting novices. If the novices are targeted first, they are going to have a bad experience when python libraries don't work with py3, and library maintainers are going to have a bad experience when clueless newbies harass them to update their software without understanding the magnitude of the work to do so. I've been predicting this for years, but two days into Python 3's release, I've already seen real-world examples of this pattern in #twisted. I can tell these people to downgrade to py2 when they come ask me for help, but I don't think most of them ask for help. They just get angry and learn Java instead. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 01:47 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In spite of Python being a programming language, there is a difference between 'casual user of the language' and 'library developer'; 3.0 is certainly a must for all actual library developers, and I'm sure most of them know about 3.0 by now. We're talking about first impressions for people without that knowledge. Well if most library developers already know 3.0 by now, I would hope they aren't going to sit on their hands, and solve the issues at hand! The best thing for 3.0 adoption would be a 3.0 welcoming committee. A group of hackers wandering from one popular open source library to another, writing patches for 3.x compatibility issues. There must be lots of people who care about 3.x adoption, and this is probably the most effective way they can reach that goal. Each time I am going to fix a 3.0 compatibility issue, I have a choice: I can either make Twisted itself better (add features, fix bugs), or I can keep Twisted exactly the same but do lots of work so it will work on 3.0. It seems pretty clear to me that, to the extent that I have time for Twisted, fixing bugs in the HTTP implementation would be a better deal than puzzling through a megabyte of diffs generated by 2to3, trying to understand where it went wrong, and how. This doesn't mean I'm sitting on my hands. It just means I have better things to be doing with my hands. (To be precise, 1054 better things to do, re: Twisted. Add in the Divmod projects and it's more like 3000.) Of course the distant threat of an unmaintained 2.x series is enough to motivate me to push a *little* in this direction, but it doesn't make me happy about it. I think this is exactly what the marketing effort around 3.0 needs to be doing: making a positive case for library and application authors to spend time to update to 3.x. This is a lot of work, and many (I might even say most) of us need a lot of cajoling. Free patches are a good incentive :). ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:24 AM, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Dec 3, 2008, at 9:13 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: On this page: http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.0/ The text This is a proeuction release should probably read This is a production release. It would give a better first impression :) Fixed, thanks! I tried to find the documentation here: http://python.org/doc/ but clicking on the links: http://docs.python.org/whatsnew/3.0.html http://docs.python.org/3.0 gives me: 404 Not Found Ondrej ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Ondrej Certik wrote: I tried to find the documentation here: http://python.org/doc/ but clicking on the links: http://docs.python.org/whatsnew/3.0.html http://docs.python.org/3.0 These 404 for me as well. but the dev links have already rolled over to 3.1a0. There are also no cross-links from the main 2.6 docs to the released py3k docs. I was going to suggest there needs to be something in PEP 101 about checking the doc links, but it's already there :) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 08:51:33PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote: On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I am happy to announce the release of Python 3.0 final. Yay! We are confident that Python 3.0 is of the same high quality as our previous releases, such as the recently announced Python 2.6. We will continue to support and develop both Python 3 and Python 2 for the foreseeable future, and you can safely choose either version (or both) to use in your projects. Which you choose depends on your own needs and the availability of third-party packages that you depend on. Some other things to consider: I think we should also have a statement upon on python.org about future plans: e.g. * that there will be a Python 2.7 that will incorporate what we learn from people trying to port, * that 3.1 will rearrange the standard library in mostly-known ways, and * that we expect people to use 3.0 mostly for compatibility testing, not going into serious production use until 3.1 or maybe even 3.2. (The details are open to discussion, of course.) --amk ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Nick Coghlan schrieb: Ondrej Certik wrote: I tried to find the documentation here: http://python.org/doc/ but clicking on the links: http://docs.python.org/whatsnew/3.0.html http://docs.python.org/3.0 These 404 for me as well. but the dev links have already rolled over to 3.1a0. There are also no cross-links from the main 2.6 docs to the released py3k docs. I was going to suggest there needs to be something in PEP 101 about checking the doc links, but it's already there :) I can't find any docs built for Python 3.0 (not 3.1a0). I would have handled building and uploading the docs if somebody (or at least anybody) had told me I was to do it. Now we again have the situation that the docs for the new release are wrecked. Georg -- Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less. Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Georg Brandl wrote: Nick Coghlan schrieb: Ondrej Certik wrote: I tried to find the documentation here: http://python.org/doc/ but clicking on the links: http://docs.python.org/whatsnew/3.0.html http://docs.python.org/3.0 These 404 for me as well. but the dev links have already rolled over to 3.1a0. There are also no cross-links from the main 2.6 docs to the released py3k docs. I was going to suggest there needs to be something in PEP 101 about checking the doc links, but it's already there :) I can't find any docs built for Python 3.0 (not 3.1a0). I would have handled building and uploading the docs if somebody (or at least anybody) had told me I was to do it. Now we again have the situation that the docs for the new release are wrecked. Sounds like we need a bot to check the web each new release before the release manager presses the button and makes the announcement. regards Steve -- Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
2008/12/4 A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED]: * that there will be a Python 2.7 that will incorporate what we learn from people trying to port, * that 3.1 will rearrange the standard library in mostly-known ways, and * that we expect people to use 3.0 mostly for compatibility testing, not going into serious production use until 3.1 or maybe even 3.2. I think that would be fantastic to have a small set of straightforward sentences like these, to transmit the most important stuff. For my part, when it's fixed, I will translate them to spanish and propagate them. (The details are open to discussion, of course.) I think those are fine. I would add something about the migration path, something like If you want to start testing your library/system in 3.0, you should first use Python 2.6, see migration details [here] Regards, -- .Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/ ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Georg Brandl wrote: I can't find any docs built for Python 3.0 (not 3.1a0). The Windows installation has new 3.0 doc dated Dec 3, so it was built, just not posted correctly. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
From: A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think we should also have a statement upon on python.org about future plans: e.g. * that there will be a Python 2.7 that will incorporate what we learn from people trying to port, * that 3.1 will rearrange the standard library in mostly-known ways, and * that we expect people to use 3.0 mostly for compatibility testing, not going into serious production use until 3.1 or maybe even 3.2. The latter statement worries me. It seems to unnecessarily undermine adoption of 3.0. It essentially says, don't use this. Is that what we want? ISTM, 3.0 is in pretty good shape. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with it. The number one adoption issue is external, i.e. how quickly key third-party modules get converted. Raymond ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
2008/12/4 Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED]: * that 3.1 will rearrange the standard library in mostly-known ways, and * that we expect people to use 3.0 mostly for compatibility testing, not going into serious production use until 3.1 or maybe even 3.2. The latter statement worries me. It seems to unnecessarily undermine adoption of 3.0. It essentially says, don't use this. Is that what we want? ISTM, 3.0 is in pretty good shape. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with it. The number one adoption issue is external, i.e. how quickly key third-party modules get converted. I agree. I tried to put a positive spin on the announcement, and the backward compatibility issue in particular. I probably failed. Hmm, looking back, the quote Raymond is referring to is just a suggestion for additional text on the 3.0 page. I agree with him that it's a bit too negative. The announcement itself hits just the right note in my view. You (Barry) seem to have got it pretty well on target. One thing I'd like to see more clearly stated is that there's no reason NOT to use Python 3.0 for new code. I don't think that message has really come across yet - in spite of the warnings being all about compatibility issues, no-one has stressed the simple point that if your code is new, it doesn't have compatibility concerns! Paul. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 20:20:34 +, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008/12/4 Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [snip] One thing I'd like to see more clearly stated is that there's no reason NOT to use Python 3.0 for new code. I don't think that message has really come across yet - in spite of the warnings being all about compatibility issues, no-one has stressed the simple point that if your code is new, it doesn't have compatibility concerns! New code that wouldn't be more easily written with a dependency on a library that hasn't been ported, you mean. Although beyond that, there may be reasons (for example, the significant performance degradation in the I/O library currently being discussed on python-list). Jean-Paul ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
A.M. Kuchling wrote: * that 3.1 will rearrange the standard library in mostly-known ways, and * that we expect people to use 3.0 mostly for compatibility testing, not going into serious production use until 3.1 or maybe even 3.2. As Raymond notes, this is probably too negative: for new projects, 3.0 should be fine so long as they don't need too many external libraries in the short term. For projects migrating from Python 2.x, the 3rd party library support problem is likely to hold a lot of projects back for several months at least, possibly to the point where it makes more sense to just wait for 2.7/3.1 to finalise any migration plans. Such projects are still well-advised to start their porting efforts as soon as possible though so they can identify *which* of their external dependencies don't have python 3.0 compatible versions available yet. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 08:20:34PM +, Paul Moore wrote: Hmm, looking back, the quote Raymond is referring to is just a suggestion for additional text on the 3.0 page. I agree with him that it's a bit too negative. Actually I want it to be an entirely separate page so that we can point people to it. has really come across yet - in spite of the warnings being all about compatibility issues, no-one has stressed the simple point that if your code is new, it doesn't have compatibility concerns! Well, at least not until you decide you need some particular external library that hasn't been ported to 3.0 yet. For example, if you go to discussion threads such as http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7h7d7/python_3000_is_ready/, you can see people making statements like I've been holding off learning it until 3000 went gold. But I think starting with Python 3.0 is a bad idea for a newbie, because they'll be limited in what they can do until the libraries have been ported. They can do some tasks (command-line tools, Fibonacci functions, Tk GUIs), but can they use the fancy new web framework they've just read about? Write a game? Draw graphs with matplotlib? Use and extend an application such as Roundup? Bzzt, no, not yet! Starting with 3.0 is starting out on an island. While I expect the island will grow in territory over time, I'm worried that new learners will automatically go for the highest version number, find their available tools are highly restricted, and get frustrated. Perhaps the statement could say something like we do not expect most Python packages will be ported to the 3.x series until around the time 3.1 is released in X months. (where X=12? 6?) --amk ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
From: A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perhaps the statement could say something like we do not expect most Python packages will be ported to the 3.x series until around the time 3.1 is released in X months. (where X=12? 6?) I would leave out any discussion of 3.1. Its content and release date have nothing to do with when third party modules get updated. Also, we don't know the timing of the third-party updates. Some may never get converted. Some may convert quickly and easily. Someone (perhaps me) may organize a series of funded sprints to get many of the major packages converted. It would be better to simply say that at the present time, most important third-party modules do not yet support 3.0. FWIW, my father is Python newbie and I'm pointing him to 3.0 because it will be easier to learn than 2.6's hodgepodge of new and old features. The 3.0 environment is much cleaner. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
2008/12/4 Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Also, we don't know the timing of the third-party updates. Some may never get converted. Some may convert quickly and easily. Someone (perhaps me) may organize a series of funded sprints to get many of the major packages converted. One piece of encouraging news I heard today is that mod_wsgi apparently works with 3.0 already - which may well mean that more web software than I'd originally anticipated will work sooner rather than later. But it's certainly true that Python (all versions, not just 3.0) is more of an ecosystem than just the CPython core. Batteries included notwithstanding. And it'll take longer for the 3.0 ecosystem to grow than the 2.6 one. Paul. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
I can't find any docs built for Python 3.0 (not 3.1a0). The Windows installation has new 3.0 doc dated Dec 3, so it was built, just not posted correctly. That doesn't mean very much. I built it on my local machine. Anybody with subversion and python could do that; the documentation is in subversion. Whether or not it appears on the web site as part of the release process is an entirely different matter. It used to be that the doc maintainer (Fred Drake) was part of the release team and release process. I think Georg is complaining that he is release maintainer, but not part of the release process. Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
ISTM, 3.0 is in pretty good shape. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with it. I think it has many bugs, some known before the release, but many more yet to show up. I agree that the design is good; the implementation will certainly improve (I deliberately didn't say could have been better, because it could not have been better, given the time available to the contributors). Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Dec 4, 2008, at 6:21 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: I can't find any docs built for Python 3.0 (not 3.1a0). The Windows installation has new 3.0 doc dated Dec 3, so it was built, just not posted correctly. That doesn't mean very much. I built it on my local machine. Anybody with subversion and python could do that; the documentation is in subversion. Whether or not it appears on the web site as part of the release process is an entirely different matter. It used to be that the doc maintainer (Fred Drake) was part of the release team and release process. I think Georg is complaining that he is release maintainer, but not part of the release process. I've asked Georg to update PEP 101 to make his role as Documentation Expert explicit. Unfortunately we only debug major releases once (or twice) every 18 months. But next time, we'll get that part right for sure! In the meantime, I'll make sure Georg is involved in point releases moving forward. - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSThm8HEjvBPtnXfVAQJgGgP/eiAUroHbxvpJLT8JRpW5H+nmyU5yGGCY NZYrU/Vm2vRPFyfDevOFErQX9Jr1LqO0x4Qgxm4PpIj3OVwM16INz98as6nONEhC MfTjf8Pp7f5BrF7HYh1XfPqTy5qpVhAkzKrCcjUk2VT/JHzJ4wrAl+29VhDTjvrz 3SXphnxWi6w= =dfm7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
2008/12/4 Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Also, we don't know the timing of the third-party updates. Some may never get converted. Some may convert quickly and easily. Someone (perhaps me) may organize a series of funded sprints to get many of the major packages converted. From: Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] One piece of encouraging news I heard today is that mod_wsgi apparently works with 3.0 already - which may well mean that more web software than I'd originally anticipated will work sooner rather than later. But it's certainly true that Python (all versions, not just 3.0) is more of an ecosystem than just the CPython core. Batteries included notwithstanding. And it'll take longer for the 3.0 ecosystem to grow than the 2.6 one. Here's a bright idea. On the 3.0 release page, include a box listing which major third-party apps have been converted. Update it once every couple of weeks. That way, we're not explicitly discouraging adoption of 3.0, we're just listing what support is then currently available (if you need twisted and its not on the list, then that would be your guide). Raymond ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Raymond Hettinger wrote: From: A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perhaps the statement could say something like we do not expect most Python packages will be ported to the 3.x series until around the time 3.1 is released in X months. (where X=12? 6?) I would leave out any discussion of 3.1. Its content and release date have nothing to do with when third party modules get updated. Also, we don't know the timing of the third-party updates. Some may never get converted. Some may convert quickly and easily. Someone (perhaps me) may organize a series of funded sprints to get many of the major packages converted. It would be better to simply say that at the present time, most important third-party modules do not yet support 3.0. FWIW, my father is Python newbie and I'm pointing him to 3.0 because it will be easier to learn than 2.6's hodgepodge of new and old features. The 3.0 environment is much cleaner. I agree with all 4 points, especially the last. I think newcomers should be informed of the +/- of different versions and then choose for themselves. For full battery availability, 2.5 is it and will be for some months. For a fresh start without need of extras, 3.0 wins in my experience so far. tjr ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:29:31PM -0800, Raymond Hettinger wrote: Here's a bright idea. On the 3.0 release page, include a box listing which major third-party apps have been converted. Update it once every couple of weeks. That way, we're not explicitly That's an excellent idea. We could have a webpage, or start a topic-specific weblog for posting announcements. I've started a draft of a 3.0 FAQ in the wiki at http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python3000/FAQ. Once it's finished we can move it into the 3.0 release pages. Everyone please edit and improve it! --amk ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 02:35 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:29:31PM -0800, Raymond Hettinger wrote: Here's a bright idea. On the 3.0 release page, include a box listing which major third-party apps have been converted. Update it once every couple of weeks. That way, we're not explicitly That's an excellent idea. We could have a webpage, or start a topic-specific weblog for posting announcements. I've started a draft of a 3.0 FAQ in the wiki at http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python3000/FAQ. Once it's finished we can move it into the 3.0 release pages. Everyone please edit and improve it! It occurs to me that this specific idea (the box with the list of supported applications / libraries) should be implementable as a simple query against PyPI. I don't know if it actually is :), but it should be. In general it would be nice to know whether one's favorite tools were available for *any* new Python version. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It occurs to me that this specific idea (the box with the list of supported applications / libraries) should be implementable as a simple query against PyPI. I don't know if it actually is :), but it should be. In general it would be nice to know whether one's favorite tools were available for *any* new Python version. I agree, this would be ideal. I'm not sure the metadata is there to support it, though. Each (version of each) package would need to register metadata recording which versions of Python it's known to be compatible with (has been tested with). I'd love for this to be available, and would be more proactive about testing software I've been involved in releasing against more Python versions. -Fred -- Fred Drake fdrake at acm.org ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
I hear some folks are considering advertising 3.0 as experimental or not ready for serious use yet. I think that's too negative -- we should encourage people to use it, period. They'll have to decide for themselves whether they can live with the lack of ported 3rd party libraries -- which may resolve itself soon enough. We should make it clear that it's perfectly fine to stick with 2.6, but at the same time encourage people to try 3.0 and see for themselves -- IMO it's as solid as 2.6. (2.6.1 being more solid, of course, as will be 3.0.1). Especially from the education front I've heard a lot of positive noises about 3.0. See e.g. an early review, posted 8 months ago: http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html. I also want to remind folks that I've promised left and right that post-3.0 we'll stick to the same backwards compatibility strategy that we used for the 2.x series. No new incompatibilities. No new features in 3.0.1 etc.; those go in 3.1, 3.2, etc. The only compromise I'd be willing to make is that 3.1 can be rather sooner than the typical 18-24 months cycle. But any API that exists in 3.0 will have to take the regular deprecation route, and if we start having releases close together we should be careful to measure the deprecation time in years, not releases. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 4 Dec, 07:12 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The latter statement worries me. It seems to unnecessarily undermine adoption of 3.0. It essentially says, don't use this. Is that what we want? I think so. The default case, the case of the user without the wherewithal to understand the nuances of the distinction between 2.x and 3.x, is a user who should use 2.x. If the user understands what's going on, they're not going to pay attention to such a notice anyway. I think Barry did a great job phrasing this; the language in this comment has to be strong enough to counter the prevailing wisdom that higher version number = better. I think it did that without being overly negative. For most users, especially new users who have yet to be impressed with Python's power, 2.x is much better. It's not like library support is one small check-box on the language's feature sheet: most of the attractive things about Python are libraries. Of course I am not free from bias, being the author of many libraries myself, but it was other libraries that drew me to Python in the first place. If you're writing an application with 2.x, you get GTK, Qt, PyGame, PIL, NumPy, and of course the wonderful Twisted. With 3.0, you get... Tkinter, and ... pywin32, I guess, although I can't find the download on sourceforge? A fork of django that just barely works? A half broken email module in the stdlib? All things which you can *also* get on 2.x, modulo the barely works and half broken. If you're writing a library, even if you intend to support py3 as a platform on day one, you could reach a much wider audience by simply writing in 2to3-friendly style and releasing 2.x source. Writing a 3.x-only library will artificially limit your audience and make it much harder to combine your library with *other* useful Python libraries which have not yet been ported. There's no 3to2 yet, and maybe there never will be. (py3to2 looks like an interesting project, but seems to be misleadingly named, since I don't think it will help you run your 3.x-source programs on a stock 2.x VM). The third (albeit much less likely) option is that you're learning Python to learn to interact with a system that's scriptable in embedded Python, like Blender or Gimp. I don't think there's a single system of that variety which uses 3.0 yet, and these will likely be even slower to move than libraries. So if the user downloads Python 3 and the accompanying tutorial they're likely to be confused when they try to use their newly-acquired knowledge to script the tool in question. Of course, in the long term, maintenance for 2.x is going away and we are all being gently herded to 3.x. Aren't the things I just talked about the reason for the continued maintenance of 2.x, though? It makes sense to talk about 3.1 and beyond, because that points to some continuity with 3.0. It doesn't make sense to say don't use it, but it does make sense to say use it to get ready for the eventual direction of the language. For example, my experience so far suggests that the only motion on Twisted towards 3.x during the 3.0.x/2.6.x cycle will be us reporting bugs in 2to3 and in the new version of the stdlib. 3.1 is likely to be the first version we could realistically target. I am sure that many other libraries are in a similar situation, since 2to3 has not yet been exposed to a wide variety of ugly, real-world code, and nobody's maintaining an #ifdef'd up C extension module yet. By the time 3.1 rolls around, we will all know how this migration strategy is really working out, and will be able to predict the likely migration timetable for various libraries with some degree of accuracy. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:40 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The default case, the case of the user without the wherewithal to understand the nuances of the distinction between 2.x and 3.x, is a user who should use 2.x. Not at all clear. If they're not sensitive to those nuances it's just as likely that they're a casual developer (e.g. a student just learning to program). Such users are unlikely to start using major 3rd party packages like Twisted or Django, which would be completely overwhelming to someone just learning. As shown in http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html, Python 3.0 removes quite a few warts that are likely to trip up learners. Once they are ready (probably under the wings of some guru) to dive deeper, they may have to learn about 2.6 and how it differs -- that's a useful exercise by itself, but if I'm right, most learners won't have to go there because by the time they get to that point, the 3.0 ecosystem has matured enough to support their needs. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 04:16 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hear some folks are considering advertising 3.0 as experimental or not ready for serious use yet. With all due respect, for me, library support and serious use are synonymous. When prompted I would say that 2.5 is probably the version that a new Python user should use. It's what's already installed on their Mac or their Ubuntu box, and it's easiest to get libraries for. I've already said in my other note why I think the python website should say the same. Speaking of respect, out of respect for all of you folks I have refrained from shouting this opinion from the rooftops. I have avoided blogging about it, I've kept all my public feedback on this list, and I plan to continue saying nothing (elsewhere) until I have something nice to say. (The occasional snide comment on IRC notwithstanding.) That doesn't mean I'm going to tell people who have real problems to solve to mess around trying out 3.0, just to see if it has the library support that they need, when I already know that it doesn't. Sorry, but community spirit only goes so far: when people ask for my recommendation, I'm going to tell the truth. For example, I recently helped my sister do some work that involved running a Fourier transform over a large amount of data. Doing this with python 2.5 took only a few minutes (numpy apparently preinstalled on leopard!); much faster than trying to debug the obscure errors she was getting out of Fortran. Doing it with Python 3.0 would have been an exercise in frustration (no numpy yet at all), and even 2.6 would have been a pain (download, compile, install, get numpy, compile, install, etc etc). If python 3.0 had for some reason *been* the preinstalled version, we would have needed to download 2.6 or 2.5. For this reason I don't want to encourage the upstream, in this case Apple, to consider 3.0 ready yet either. 2.x is still a necessity, even if they want to start shipping 3.0 soon. In my experience this is an entirely typical usage of Python. I know very few people who have learned the language for its own sake (and in fact, the two I can think of right now have long since switched to Haskell); it's almost always for this or that library. In the cases where it is for the language itself, the conversation almost always begins, Hey, I've been thinking about learning Python. Can it do $TASK?. If the answer is (as it often is) Sure, just use Py$TASK then they're immediately sold. If not, learn python remains one of their never-done back-burner projects like clean out the garage. Even in my own case, I learned Python because it was easier to write GTK+ programs in than C; Java's GUI libraries having been demonstrated deficient, I wanted something better. The networking stuff was a side- effect. Given that this is my typical experience of Python introductions (of which I have done quite a few), until a majority of Py$TASK for $TASKs that I'm interested in have been ported to py3, then even in the abstract, py3 remains experimental and not ready for serious use. That's not the same thing as bad: IMO it's as solid as 2.6. (2.6.1 being more solid, of course, as will be 3.0.1). I have not heard anyone saying that 3.0 is flaky, broken, or beta. I certainly haven't said that, or even thought it. Library support is _the_ problem. Especially from the education front I've heard a lot of positive noises about 3.0. See e.g. an early review, posted 8 months ago: http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html. To be fair, if someone asked me specifically about educating non- programmer adults about programming, I would probably at least *mention* py3, if not recommend it outright. The improved consistency is worth a lot in an educational setting. (But, if one is educating children and interested in soliciting their genuine enthusiasm, whiz-bang graphics are really a must-have, not a negotiable extra.) Note, however, that even this paper specifically mentions several libraries which must be available, or they will have to abandon these examples entirely or (reluctantly) delay adoption of version 3.0. I hope for Mr. Efford's sake that these libraries will all become available shortly. They have all taken steps to produce 3.0-compatible versions. However, none are available today, making it still a difficult choice to use 3 rather than 2. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
Here's a bright idea. On the 3.0 release page, include a box listing which major third-party apps have been converted. Update it once every couple of weeks. That way, we're not explicitly discouraging adoption of 3.0, we're just listing what support is then currently available (if you need twisted and its not on the list, then that would be your guide). As a slight variation: that should be a wiki page (or, as AMK suggests, a weblog). The release page should link to it. If maintenance of this list was in the hands of a single person (the release manager), or a few (the pydotorg editors), it would always be outdated. FWIW, there is also the py3 category in PyPI: http://pypi.python.org/pypi?:action=browsec=533 Regads, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Dec 5, 2008, at 2:27 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: There is. There have been the following trove classifiers defined for a few weeks now: Wonderful! Thanks for clueing me in. I'll update my projects to use those in future releases. -Fred -- Fred Drake fdrake at acm.org ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On 06:05 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:40 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The default case, the case of the user without the wherewithal to understand the nuances of the distinction between 2.x and 3.x, is a user who should use 2.x. Not at all clear. If they're not sensitive to those nuances it's just as likely that they're a casual developer (e.g. a student just learning to program). Such users are unlikely to start using major 3rd party packages like Twisted or Django, which would be completely overwhelming to someone just learning. As shown in http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html, Python 3.0 removes quite a few warts that are likely to trip up learners. Once they are ready (probably under the wings of some guru) to dive deeper, they may have to learn about 2.6 and how it differs -- that's a useful exercise by itself, but if I'm right, most learners won't have to go there because by the time they get to that point, the 3.0 ecosystem has matured enough to support their needs. Well, ultimately the way you want to position this is your decision, but you haven't convinced me. My experience of casual developers suggests that they are _extremely_ sensitive to such nuances. Library support is a big one, but even bigger than that is the reporting of errors when mismatched versions don't work together. Are they going to understand that 3.0 and 2.6 are actually different languages, or are they just going to think that something's broken when they double-click on a .pyw file they got from some random python 2.x tutorial, with python 3 for windows installed? My interest is not hypothetical. I am trying to avoid hearing someone say this to me: Oh yeah, Python, I tried that, but it didn't work. I use Visual Basic now and it's pretty good. It has good graphics. This type of confusion will persist for years. It will probably be worst at the point where both versions are enjoying equal popularity, but at least by then all the tutorials and tools will loudly say python TWO or python THREE on them. At least now, at the outset, it is pretty clear what direction the confusatron's going to tilt in. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I am happy to announce the release of Python 3.0 final. Python 3.0 (a.k.a. Python 3000 or Py3k) represents a major milestone in Python's history, and was nearly three years in the making. This is a new version of the language that is incompatible with the 2.x line of releases, while remaining true to BDFL Guido van Rossum's vision. Some things you will notice include: * Fixes to many old language warts * Removal of long deprecated features and redundant syntax * Improvements in, and a reorganization of, the standard library * Changes to the details of how built-in objects like strings and dicts work * ...and many more new features While these changes were made without concern for backward compatibility, Python 3.0 still remains very much Pythonic. We are confident that Python 3.0 is of the same high quality as our previous releases, such as the recently announced Python 2.6. We will continue to support and develop both Python 3 and Python 2 for the foreseeable future, and you can safely choose either version (or both) to use in your projects. Which you choose depends on your own needs and the availability of third-party packages that you depend on. Some other things to consider: * Python 3 has a single Unicode string type; there are no more 8-bit strings * The C API has changed considerably in Python 3.0 and third-party extension modules you rely on may not yet be ported * Tools are available in both Python 2.6 and 3.0 to help you migrate your code * Python 2.6 is backward compatible with earlier Python 2.x releases We encourage you to participate in Python 3.0's development process by joining its mailing list: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 If you find things in Python 3.0 that are broken or incorrect, please submit bug reports at: http://bugs.python.org/ For more information, links to documentation, and downloadable distributions, see the Python 3.0 website: http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.0/ Enjoy, - -Barry Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager (on behalf of the entire python-dev team) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSTc3pXEjvBPtnXfVAQI69wP/dPHh8IL3GxziEV9QzlveKG+KyZb2X16x fxJnTCiXAbiAhT5C+m43OEnbF1PJgMDKtcZ5b7aQb4TQ0mJxISTQh0RfLCpArmlo tdTbzCLnh13KzB+3sUHCx+MeQNXERoWDV8hLz+4Ae71UsuUGynhtyP7ZJMJDue8j so2gv3fOMSs= =vkiy -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Dec 3, 2008, at 9:13 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: On this page: http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.0/ The text This is a proeuction release should probably read This is a production release. It would give a better first impression :) Fixed, thanks! - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSTc/WHEjvBPtnXfVAQL8TwP+M2Ryv7WY36ICEvzGU4EzlRG/gI4MolQe cD8DJUJfQuR6INTot/t7vTcL8oDHq7q9OHbfvd3jmSwH/ZytsMz2OvJUYlKDQjwG BcQRpioprcesoU6cufSmKAUiUP+L0RTAMmT0WDbbeCzzMZRq3Humd4Zs43nL26NT uFb83Dk6yWA= =qPjn -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final
On Dec 3, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I am happy to announce the release of Python 3.0 final. Props to all the folks whose hard work made this possible! You guys rock! -- Ed Leafe ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
