It strikes me that both moving to Python3 and dropping Genshi in 1.5 makes 
a whole lot of sense. No need to try to make all the Genshi things knocking 
around work with Python 3 (presuming there's even an official Python3 
compatible Genshi release by that time) . Anything with Genshi dependencies 
has a hard ceiling of Trac 1.4. Makes things very clear. -JL

On Monday, June 4, 2018 at 10:37:39 PM UTC-5, RjOllos wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 6:43:13 PM UTC-7, RjOllos wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 11:05:02 AM UTC-8, RjOllos wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 8:08:59 AM UTC-8, cboos wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello, 
>>>>
>>>> On 12/30/2016 1:07 AM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: 
>>>> > I may be jumping the gun a bit as a 1.3.2 (jinga2) tag hasn't been 
>>>> > declared yet, but what is the state of the python3 support progress? 
>>>>
>>>> On this topic... 
>>>>
>>>> I've just seen the following from Python-announce, it's probably not 
>>>> the 
>>>> first time they say it, but it's the first time I pay attention: 
>>>>
>>>> > Python 3.4 is now in "security fixes only" mode.  This is the final 
>>>> stage of support for Python 3.4.  Python 3.4 now only receives security 
>>>> fixes, not bug fixes, and Python 3.4 releases are source code only--no 
>>>> more official binary installers will be produced. 
>>>>
>>>> It's great that we can now focus on using only Python 2.7 for trunk, 
>>>> and 
>>>> though I'd love to be able to continue to have only that version in 
>>>> mind, I see that the interest for supporting Python 3.x is there, so I 
>>>> won't stand in the way, and maybe even help out a bit... 
>>>>
>>>> But I don't want to have to take into account more quirks than 
>>>> necessary 
>>>> by supporting already deprecated 3.x versions. So can we please forget 
>>>> about 3.4 support, at the very least? 
>>>>
>>>> Supporting 3.5 and 3.6 will "only" triple the maintenance cost for 
>>>> running tests and the risks of hitting bugs and quirks specific to this 
>>>> or that Python version (we already were there). Personally I'll focus 
>>>> on 
>>>> 3.5, I think. 
>>>>
>>>> So here's my strong vote for supporting only Python 3.5 and 3.6 for 
>>>> Trac 
>>>> 1.3.2, let's forget about the earlier 3.x versions. 
>>>>
>>>> -- Christian 
>>>>
>>>> P.S: and Ian, it's Jinja2, not jinga2 (nor ginsha ;-) ) 
>>>>
>>>
>>> I fully agree with only supporting Python 3.5 and 3.6, along with Python 
>>> 2.7.
>>>
>>> My motivation for moving to Python 3.x is similar to your motivation for 
>>> not supporting Python 3.4 and earlier. Python 2.7 is in maintenance mode 
>>> and won't be supported beyond 2020. Eventually we'll need a plan for moving 
>>> off Python 2.7, and having a pathway to 3.x sooner rather than later will 
>>> be better for the project.
>>>
>>> I've been working on rebasing Jun's python3 branch (#12130) for the past 
>>> week. The tests are passing on Python 2 and I have 6 more errors to fix on 
>>> Python 3.6. I'll make the branch public soon since I expect there is a lot 
>>> more work to do, including code review.
>>>
>>> - Ryan
>>>
>>
>>
>> I think it's worth considering to just do a switch to Python 3.5+ in Trac 
>> 1.5.1 rather than supporting 2.7 and 3.5+.
>> * Python 2.7 is end-of-life in 2020 (PEP:0373)
>> * Optimistically, Trac 1.6 would be July 2018
>> * We could continue to support Trac 1.4.x through 2020
>> * Targeting fewer python versions can increase development velocity on 
>> the trunk
>> * We can take advantage of the improvements in Python3 without concern 
>> for a six compatibility layer
>> * Backward compatibility for old python versions will likely continue to 
>> be less important with the adoptions of containers and other isolated 
>> environments
>>
>> I would like to look to the future, improve my proficiency in the latest 
>> versions of Python focus and focus on adding features. It feels like we've 
>> had an excessive focus on the past (e.g. active development supporting 
>> Python 2.5 continues for Trac 1.0-stable) and I think it hinders the 
>> project. I can think of some counterpoints, I just don't think any of them 
>> are as important as the points I've listed. Django is dropping support for 
>> Python2 in the next major release (1).
>>
>> Are there any arguments for needing to continue to have the latest stable 
>> release run on Python 2.7 in mid-to-late 2018? It would seem to me that 
>> anyone wanting to stay with the latest Trac can spend the next 12-18 months 
>> on their migration plan for this tiny web app.
>>
>> - Ryan
>>
>> (1) https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2015/jun/25/roadmap/
>>
>
> Tim has pushed some patches to move us towards Python3, so I'm raising 
> this topic again for discussion. I still favor switching to Python3 in a 
> 1.5.x release and supporting Trac 1.4-stable through 2020. The Python 
> foundation is no longer supporting Python 2.7 on Jan 1st, 2020.
>
> Tim proposed using "six" to keep all the tests passing on a branch while 
> migrating to Python3. Presumably we would just discard those changesets to 
> drop Python 2.7 support, if we are to go with a branch supporting Python 
> 3.5+.
>
> It seems like there are options other than the six module. I've seen a 
> fair bit of discussion about "future" lately:
> https://pypi.org/project/future/
>
> I'm also hoping to do some work on git-svn mirroring this summer so that 
> we have the option of committing directly to Git, and perhaps directly to a 
> Git repository on GitHub. One or both of those changes make it easier to 
> push staged changes.
>
> - Ryan
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac 
Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to