Just found this interesting article about what the python scientific
community feels as "standard":
https://www.webucator.com/blog/2016/03/still-using-python-2-it-is-time-to-upgrade/
The community is large and populated by many small and tightly
inter-dependent niches, where py version is a negligible detail. Many of
us still has one or two niche packages which still forbids upgrade to 3
(in my case, I have py-twisted...).
I think Veusz did a very good job supporting both 2 and 3. I agree that
compiled packages can be moved to Py3/Qt5, if you think it is tested and
stable enough.
But, would it be worth to throw away all the work Jeremy did to support
both, by dropping support of py2/qt4, given the community seems still
divided 50/50?
Jeremy, can you quantify/exemplify the amount of burden involved in
keeping compatibility, as the qt5 branch becomes the default?
Il 17/03/2016 21:15, Christian Ambros ha scritto:
So, are there any decision yet about finally switching to standards?
PyQt5 is worth it.
cheers,
Christian
-- "A little learning never caused anyone's head to explode!" "Ein
wenig Lernen hat noch niemandens Kopf zum Explodieren gebracht!"
On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 9:44 AM, Daniele Paganelli
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all,
I am relying on current Veusz, Py2 and Qt4 for Misura package
(tainstr/misura.client).
I know that also Python(x,y) distribution is still Py2 and Qt4. I rely
on that distribution to quickly install a complete environment on Windows.
Anyway, I am not voting to keep Veusz behind! Go ahead and move to Qt5
and Py3 whenever you like: it will be a good testing phase for me.
Until I can schedule some time to upgrade, my contributions to Veusz
will probably be to the Py2/Qt4 branch.
There is no technical reason to stick with those versions: only lack of
time. It's a complex system and Py/Qt is just a detail for me.
Regards,
Daniele
Il 23/02/2016 09:19, Jeremy Sanders ha scritto:
> Hi all
>
> As an additional question, how many people are relying on Veusz Python
> 2 compatibility?
>
> There would be some advantages in dropping the Python 2 support, such
> as the reducing costs in maintenance and testing.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeremy
>
>
> On 23/02/16 05:55, Christian Ambros wrote:
>> Hi Jeremy,
>>
>> I'm waiting for a long time for this step. And in some cases I'm using
>> pretty old laptops which do not have problems with Qt5 either. Even
that
>> old T42 Thinkpad of my parents, who where teachers runs fine. They are
>> now supporting their school as consultants during their retirement and
>> came into situations where they had to do statistical work. They are
>> running the Qt5 version you offered some month ago and are pretty happy
>> with it. This shows that there are no problems with old hardware.
>> Since 3D still isn't an option, and switching to matplotlib was denied
>> by you earlier because you didn't want to depend on such, but standard,
>> libs, there won't be any problem wit Qt5 in any direction.
>>
>> So I welcome this change and encourage you to do this step, as one in
>> the right direction since Qt5 is standard since 2012.
>> I disagree with Benjamin about depending on LTS version, because this
>> behavior doesn't cause enough pressure on the developers to be up to
>> standards when they are published. Take a look at python3 which came as
>> standard in 2010, which was six years from now and even today there are
>> plenty of developers who think that python3 has more drawback than
>> advantages which isn't true if you go through that process of updating.
>> Those people are just afraid of learning something new. They try to
>> stick to a level but don't want to evolve themselves. With Qt5 it's the
>> same. I've been writing programs with both 4.8 and 5.5 and changing to
>> five was the best decision I made. Things got that much easier and
>> faster that even my boss couldn't believe it.
>>
>>
>> cheers,
>> Christian
>> -- "A little learning never caused anyone's head to explode!" "Ein
wenig
>> Lernen hat noch niemandens Kopf zum Explodieren gebracht!"
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 3:40 AM, Benjamin K. Stuhl
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/20/2016 7:42 AM, Jeremy Sanders wrote:
>> > Qt 4 is no longer supported and Qt 5 is included in many linux
>> > distributions.
>> >
>> > Would there be any objections if I merge the Qt 5 branch into the
>> main
>> > tree? It shouldn't affect binary distributions (though I'll need to
>> > update my setups).
>>
>> I generally like the idea, but it might be a good idea to wait
until the
>> next Ubuntu LTS is out? Trusty and derivatives, like Mint, only have
>> 5.2, so depending what version Veusz needs it might be impossible to
>> keep up your PPA after the switch to Qt 5.
>>
>> On the other hand, one could also argue for doing the switch _now_, so
>> that the version in the LTS isn't still using Qt 4 two years from
now...
>>
>> --BKS
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Veusz-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/veusz-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Veusz-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/veusz-discuss
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Veusz-discuss mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/veusz-discuss
_______________________________________________
Veusz-discuss mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/veusz-discuss
_______________________________________________
Veusz-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/veusz-discuss
