Re: GUB failure

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 11:52 PM Phil Holmes wrote: > If anyone knows how to upgrade my Ubuntu 14 machine to the later Python > version, > please say. You can use the deadsnakes ppa (fkrull/deadsnakes for pre Ubuntu-16.04,

Write permissions for lilypond sourceforge

Hello, Could I please given write access to sourceforge as I'd ideally like to contribute a few small python changes upstream from the py2to3 work continues broader discussion. My profile is https://sourceforge.net/u/masterodin/profile and the email is same as this one (matt.peve...@gmail.com).

Re: Python 3

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 7:08 PM Dan Eble wrote: > The thought that gave rise to my question was that I would be more > comfortable collaborating if these changes were in git rather than a dozen > patches in multiple messages in the mailing list archive. (I don’t intend > that to sound mean.) >

Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?)

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 5:46 PM Joram wrote: > Am 27.09.19 um 22:34 schrieb Matthew Peveler: > > long vs int, unicode vs str, StringIO vs io, iter.next vs > > iter.__next__, reload, xrange vs range. > > It is very well feasible to support both version. I hope by shims you

Re: Python 3

On Sep 30, 2019, at 14:22, David Kastrup wrote: > > But I don't see > that a clean cut from Python2 to Python3 in a single step is easily > feasible and testable for all targets at once including all GUB targets. Yeah, I did this for my own edification, and with the thought that it might make it

Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?)

3 AM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > Am Montag, den 23.09.2019, 12:26 -0300 schrieb Matthew Peveler: > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 5:52 AM Jonas Hahnfeld via lilypond-devel < > lilypond-devel@gnu.org> wrote: > > > On top of that I've worked on the attached patches which brings

Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?)

On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 12:26 PM Matthew Peveler wrote: > Please see the attached for small patches for these two things, and got "make check" to run for me using Python 3.7.4 as well. Hm, not sure why the patch files got converted to binary when sending, though I've also made t

Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?)

On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 5:52 AM Jonas Hahnfeld via lilypond-devel < lilypond-devel@gnu.org> wrote: > On top of that I've worked on the attached patches which brings the make targets check / test and doc back to life with Python 3.7.4. In applying your patches and running "make check", I

Helping with python3 development

to contribute to this effort in some part, though would require some guidance on this front on how to contribute, especially given that patches would be to a branch and not master, not fixing open bugs, etc. Regards, Matthew Peveler ___ lilypond-devel mailing