My understanding is that some of the libraries we use, like Mechanize, don't work in Python 2.4. My complaint in Bug 36063 is that we're re-implementing Mechanize poorly. I'd rather we just upgraded the machines that need to run-webkit-tests to a more modern version of Python.
Adam On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 7:41 AM, Chris Jerdonek <cjerdo...@webkit.org> wrote: > No one responded back with a summary of the Python 2.4 discussion, so > I'll attempt a summary of my own after reading-- > > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35584 > > (If you recall, we are trying to decide what Python code we write > needs to work with Python 2.4.) > > The Chromium project still uses Python 2.4 in a significant way. Some > Chromium bots run new-run-webkit-tests using 2.4, and a number of > developers use 2.4 in their development environments. Generally > speaking, people support upgrading, but no one is spearheading an > upgrade and there is no ETA. > > For the time being, because of the bots, it seems like > new-run-webkit-tests definitely needs to keep working with 2.4. But > for the tools used more in the development environment (webkit-patch, > etc), it seems like people would be willing to find a way to make > things work with 2.5+. > > It would be pretty easy to get all of our Python code working with 2.4 > (we had a patch for this a couple weeks ago), but going back wouldn't > let us use some of the nicer constructs. And we would have to contend > with at least one bug in 2.4. > > (End of summary.) > > Plainly, the options seem to be-- > > (1) All Python 2.5+ > (2) All Python 2.4 > (3) Some combination of (1) and (2) (e.g. new-run-webkit-tests 2.4, > everything else 2.5) > > However, (1) does not seem to be an option. Personally, I'm starting > to lean more toward to (2). One reason is that we are already > starting to see a case of re-implementing in Python 2.4 (for > new-run-webkit-tests) code that was already written in 2.5: > > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36063#c4 > > I also think it would be helpful if we did not need to have this > discussion for each new script we decide to write in Python. I would > be willing to update the patch from a couple weeks ago that adjusts > things for 2.4. > > --Chris > > > > > On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Chris Jerdonek <cjerdo...@webkit.org> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:43 PM, David Kilzer <ddkil...@webkit.org> wrote: >>> On Thu, March 4, 2010 at 5:35:08 PM, William Siegrist wrote: >>> >>>> Since I have a Tiger machine handy, I tested this and was able to build >>>> python >>>> 2.5.5 from MacPorts on a PowerPC. It takes a while, but it worked. I did >>>> not try >>>> python 2.6. >>> >>> I've installed python 2.6.4 using MacPorts on my PowerBook G4 running Tiger >>> 10.4.11, and it's worked find with webkit-patch the one or two times I >>> tried it. >> >> That sounds great. Thanks a lot, Dave and Bill. So does it seem safe >> to say, then, that folks on 2.3 can upgrade if it ever becomes >> necessary to use one of the tools? >> >> As for Python 2.4, I haven't been following the discussion as closely >> since it seems to affect Chromium developers more. Can someone >> summarize the state of the discussion there -- does it seem like there >> is a consensus? >> >> --Chris >> > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev