You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> on 2019/11/01 11:49:12 UTC
What versions of Python 3 do we support?
In the thread "Issue tracker housecleaning: SVN-1722",
Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote:
> However, it seems there is more general question, "What versions
> do we support on Python 3?"
>
> It seems we don't promise to support any version of Python 3 yet.
> So I think we can restrict version to support for Python 3,
> comparatively safely.
>
> Python 3.4 had reached end of life[1]. And developers might not
> have test environment with older Python 3.
Branko Čibej wrote:
> To be honest, I wouldn't care about any Python 3 older than 3.5. IMO it
> took the 3.x series quite a while to mature from "wow, a new major
> version!" to "a better scripting language". 3.5 or thereabouts was the
> turning point.
I found a nice graphic display of Python version lifetimes:
"Python Release Cycle" <https://python-release-cycle.glitch.me/>
linked from
"Python 2.7 Contdown" <https://pythonclock.org/>
My first thought is we don't want to waste effort supporting anything
that isn't going to be useful, and we should be looking ahead to what
versions it will make sense to support around the middle of next year,
when svn 1.14 LTS is being deployed.
At that point Python 3.5 will be close to its end of life, so 3.6 looks
like a reasonable minimum to require.
As Python 2.7 will be EOL before we branch svn 1.14, should we drop
support for Python 2 right now in our development (trunk)? Not remove
all existing support for it, not yet; that should wait until after we
branch svn 1.14. But right now remove the promise of 2.7 support, and
stop testing it, and stop caring about keeping compatible with it.
WDYT?
- Julian
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Holden Karau <ho...@apache.org>.
For what it's worth Apache Spark had a similar discussion last week and
decided to deprecated up to 3.6 but still support 3.6 in our next major
release (see
http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Deprecate-Python-lt-3-6-in-Spark-3-0-td28168.html
& https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26326 ).
On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 12:49 PM Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> In the thread "Issue tracker housecleaning: SVN-1722",
> Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote:
> > However, it seems there is more general question, "What versions
> > do we support on Python 3?"
> >
> > It seems we don't promise to support any version of Python 3 yet.
> > So I think we can restrict version to support for Python 3,
> > comparatively safely.
> >
> > Python 3.4 had reached end of life[1]. And developers might not
> > have test environment with older Python 3.
>
> Branko Čibej wrote:
> > To be honest, I wouldn't care about any Python 3 older than 3.5. IMO it
> > took the 3.x series quite a while to mature from "wow, a new major
> > version!" to "a better scripting language". 3.5 or thereabouts was the
> > turning point.
>
> I found a nice graphic display of Python version lifetimes:
> "Python Release Cycle" <https://python-release-cycle.glitch.me/>
> linked from
> "Python 2.7 Contdown" <https://pythonclock.org/>
>
> My first thought is we don't want to waste effort supporting anything
> that isn't going to be useful, and we should be looking ahead to what
> versions it will make sense to support around the middle of next year,
> when svn 1.14 LTS is being deployed.
>
> At that point Python 3.5 will be close to its end of life, so 3.6 looks
> like a reasonable minimum to require.
>
> As Python 2.7 will be EOL before we branch svn 1.14, should we drop
> support for Python 2 right now in our development (trunk)? Not remove
> all existing support for it, not yet; that should wait until after we
> branch svn 1.14. But right now remove the promise of 2.7 support, and
> stop testing it, and stop caring about keeping compatible with it.
>
> WDYT?
>
> - Julian
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>.
On 11/1/19 12:17 PM, Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote:
> My primary purpose to join to develop swig-py3 branch was to see that
> ViewVC officially supports Python 3.
And I'm still watching this (and related threads) with excited
anticipation of your return to that primary purpose. :-)
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Yasuhito FUTATSUKI <fu...@poem.co.jp>.
On 2019/11/01 21:59, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 01.11.2019 12:49, Julian Foad wrote:
>> In the thread "Issue tracker housecleaning: SVN-1722",
>> Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote:
>>> However, it seems there is more general question, "What versions
>>> do we support on Python 3?"
>>>
>>> It seems we don't promise to support any version of Python 3 yet.
>>> So I think we can restrict version to support for Python 3,
>>> comparatively safely.
>>>
>>> Python 3.4 had reached end of life[1]. And developers might not
>>> have test environment with older Python 3.
>>
>> Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> To be honest, I wouldn't care about any Python 3 older than 3.5. IMO it
>>> took the 3.x series quite a while to mature from "wow, a new major
>>> version!" to "a better scripting language". 3.5 or thereabouts was the
>>> turning point.
>>
>> I found a nice graphic display of Python version lifetimes:
>> "Python Release Cycle" <https://python-release-cycle.glitch.me/>
>> linked from
>> "Python 2.7 Contdown" <https://pythonclock.org/>
>>
>> My first thought is we don't want to waste effort supporting anything
>> that isn't going to be useful, and we should be looking ahead to what
>> versions it will make sense to support around the middle of next year,
>> when svn 1.14 LTS is being deployed.
>>
>> At that point Python 3.5 will be close to its end of life, so 3.6
>> looks like a reasonable minimum to require.
>
>
> "End of life" and "no longer used" are two different things. I predict
> we'll be seeing Python 2.7 and 3.5 installations for years to come,
> despite its end-of-life.
I'm sure my office continue to use Python 2.7 at least 4 years
on CentOS 7, if my office will still exist.
>> As Python 2.7 will be EOL before we branch svn 1.14, should we drop
>> support for Python 2 right now in our development (trunk)? Not remove
>> all existing support for it, not yet; that should wait until after we
>> branch svn 1.14. But right now remove the promise of 2.7 support, and
>> stop testing it, and stop caring about keeping compatible with it.
>
> Going from fully supported to not at all supported in one release seems
> like a bit of a stretch. On the other hand, if we want to be consistent,
> we'd have to add infrastructure for keeping two separate swig-py build
> trees available (e.g., for tarballs).
For users which already uses swig Python bindings in their
application and waiting for our swig binding support Python 3, dual
support of Python 2 and Python 3 can make a grace period to improve
their application for Python 3. So it is worse to do so, I think.
My primary purpose to join to develop swig-py3 branch was to see that
ViewVC officially supports Python 3.
(I myself already make ViewVC work with Python 3 experimentally
by using Cython, though. I long for someone to develop the script
to generate Cython header files from C API inclue files :))
> It's certainly easier for us to say that users who need Python 2
> bindings also need Swig.
... or add targets in Makefile to archive/extract pre-generated code
by SWIG, and bundle their archive as tarball in tarball, etc., if
the problem is shipping method only (but I don't estimate difficulty).
Cheers,
--
Yasuhito FUTATSUKI <fu...@poem.co.jp>
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 11:35 AM Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 7:49 AM Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I found a nice graphic display of Python version lifetimes:
> > "Python Release Cycle" <https://python-release-cycle.glitch.me/>
>
> This graphic is a good resource! (Aside: as part of our website
> reboot, maybe we would like to have a similar graphic for Subversion
> release and support cycles? A picture is worth 1000 words!)
>
> In terms of which Py 3.x version we ultimately choose as the minimum
> supported one going forward, we should decide sooner rather than later.
> We should give everyone the earliest possible heads up in the form of a
> "news" item on the site (and possibly an announcement email???), both
> to let everyone know that 1.14-LTS will support Py 3.x+ and to state
> that with Py 2 EOL, Py 2.7 and <3.x support will be phased out over the
> next few releases.
>
> Mark Phippard wrote:
> > We will still have to support RHEL 7 for a while
>
> Mark: How long (if known) is "a while"? Thanks...
>
>
Note by "we" I meant CollabNet in our products. We will probably support
it for its entire lifespan but maybe when there is a RHEL9 available we
will drop it. We currently still support RHEL 6 too. We do not support
RHEL 8 yet, largely due to this Python 3 issue.
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>.
>
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 7:49 AM Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> I found a nice graphic display of Python version lifetimes:
> "Python Release Cycle" <https://python-release-cycle.glitch.me/>
This graphic is a good resource! (Aside: as part of our website
reboot, maybe we would like to have a similar graphic for Subversion
release and support cycles? A picture is worth 1000 words!)
In terms of which Py 3.x version we ultimately choose as the minimum
supported one going forward, we should decide sooner rather than later.
We should give everyone the earliest possible heads up in the form of a
"news" item on the site (and possibly an announcement email???), both
to let everyone know that 1.14-LTS will support Py 3.x+ and to state
that with Py 2 EOL, Py 2.7 and <3.x support will be phased out over the
next few releases.
Mark Phippard wrote:
> We will still have to support RHEL 7 for a while
Mark: How long (if known) is "a while"? Thanks...
Nathan
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 01.11.2019 12:49, Julian Foad wrote:
> In the thread "Issue tracker housecleaning: SVN-1722",
> Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote:
>> However, it seems there is more general question, "What versions
>> do we support on Python 3?"
>>
>> It seems we don't promise to support any version of Python 3 yet.
>> So I think we can restrict version to support for Python 3,
>> comparatively safely.
>>
>> Python 3.4 had reached end of life[1]. And developers might not
>> have test environment with older Python 3.
>
> Branko Čibej wrote:
>> To be honest, I wouldn't care about any Python 3 older than 3.5. IMO it
>> took the 3.x series quite a while to mature from "wow, a new major
>> version!" to "a better scripting language". 3.5 or thereabouts was the
>> turning point.
>
> I found a nice graphic display of Python version lifetimes:
> "Python Release Cycle" <https://python-release-cycle.glitch.me/>
> linked from
> "Python 2.7 Contdown" <https://pythonclock.org/>
>
> My first thought is we don't want to waste effort supporting anything
> that isn't going to be useful, and we should be looking ahead to what
> versions it will make sense to support around the middle of next year,
> when svn 1.14 LTS is being deployed.
>
> At that point Python 3.5 will be close to its end of life, so 3.6
> looks like a reasonable minimum to require.
"End of life" and "no longer used" are two different things. I predict
we'll be seeing Python 2.7 and 3.5 installations for years to come,
despite its end-of-life.
> As Python 2.7 will be EOL before we branch svn 1.14, should we drop
> support for Python 2 right now in our development (trunk)? Not remove
> all existing support for it, not yet; that should wait until after we
> branch svn 1.14. But right now remove the promise of 2.7 support, and
> stop testing it, and stop caring about keeping compatible with it.
Going from fully supported to not at all supported in one release seems
like a bit of a stretch. On the other hand, if we want to be consistent,
we'd have to add infrastructure for keeping two separate swig-py build
trees available (e.g., for tarballs).
It's certainly easier for us to say that users who need Python 2
bindings also need Swig.
-- Brane
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
Yes, thanks.
Ever since Gmail changed this I regularly forget.
Mark
On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 11:25 AM Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> (Mark, I am assuming you meant to reply-all. Replying on-list.)
>
> Mark Phippard wrote:
> > If it it not too much work, I would like to see Py 2.7 (at least the
> bindings) still available in 1.14 LTS. We will still have to support RHEL
> 7 for a while and it would let us move to SVN 1.14 across all OS.
>
> Ack -- sounds fair.
>
> - Julian
>
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Re: What versions of Python 3 do we support?
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org>.
(Mark, I am assuming you meant to reply-all. Replying on-list.)
Mark Phippard wrote:
> If it it not too much work, I would like to see Py 2.7 (at least the bindings) still available in 1.14 LTS. We will still have to support RHEL 7 for a while and it would let us move to SVN 1.14 across all OS.
Ack -- sounds fair.
- Julian