Gentoo Archives: gentoo-python

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: Patrick McLean <chutzpah@g.o>, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-python <gentoo-python@l.g.o>, python <python@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-python] Re: [RFC] Timeline for Python 3.6 adoption
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2018 07:00:25
Message-Id: 1524898818.1013.3.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-python] Re: [RFC] Timeline for Python 3.6 adoption by Patrick McLean
1 W dniu pią, 27.04.2018 o godzinie 17∶56 -0700, użytkownik Patrick McLean
2 napisał:
3 > On 2018-04-27 09:05 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
4 > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
5 > > >
6 > > > Firstly, I'd like to do two changes simultaneously to reduce --newuse
7 > > > rebuilds:
8 > > >
9 > > > a. switching from CPython 3.5 to 3.6,
10 > > >
11 > > > b. disabling CPython 3.4.
12 >
13 > I assume you mean remove from the default PYTHON_TARGETS, not disable it
14 > completely? I would wait until after python 3.4 is no longer getting
15 > updates before removing it from the eclass and the tree.
16
17 I meant disabling it completely. The default is 3.5 for a long time
18 already, and there is no reason to expect people to go back and test
19 their packages against 3.4. The plan was to support only one Python 3.x
20 release behind current stable.
21
22 >
23 > > >
24 > > > I'm thinking of a soft deadline on 2018-06-01, i.e. giving developers
25 > > > a full month to prepare. If things don't go well, we can always
26 > > > postpone it.
27 > > >
28 > > > According to my lists, we only have 6 packages relying on py3.4 right
29 > > > now [1] and no pending stabilizations for that. I will report bugs for
30 > > > those packages today.
31 > > >
32 > > > The list for 3.5->3.6 migration is longer [2]. However, it seems that
33 > > > many of those packages are rather isolated [3] and apparently
34 > > > unmaintained. Apparently the biggest targets are OpenStack
35 > > > and Flask. It's all doable.
36 > > >
37 > > > What do you think?
38 > >
39 > > June 1 seems a little optimistic to me, but as you said we can push it
40 > > out if needed.
41 > >
42 > > This plan makes sense to me.
43 > >
44 >
45 >
46
47 --
48 Best regards,
49 Michał Górny

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-python] Re: [RFC] Timeline for Python 3.6 adoption Patrick McLean <chutzpah@g.o>