[Stackless] python 2.8 slp (Re: Fwd: [Stackless-checkins] stackless (2.7-slp): add a filter function to zipfile.PyZipFile.)

Anselm Kruis a.kruis at science-computing.de
Mon Nov 11 20:51:23 CET 2013


Hi Christian,

we (=you) should document the 2.8 policy on www.stackless.com. And we 
should think about moving the Stackless development to bitbucket or 
another platform, that supports pull requests.

In general, we should avoid the development of new features on the 
2.x-slp branch of hg.python.org/stackless. This causes bugs and 
undocumented changes every now and then. For instance, the C-Python test 
suite fails to run with 2.7-slp on Windows since Oct 25 (see 
http://www.stackless.com/ticket/26). With stackless on bitbucket, we 
could use forks for feature development and merge the results back once 
all tests pass.


Cheers
   Anselm

Am 11.11.2013 13:05, schrieb Christian Tismer:
> Hi,
>
> now I have a good reason for 2.8. I would like to:
>
> - switch compilers on windows to VS2010
>
> - only add features if they are in Python3 as well
>
> - maybe remove bsddb (because 3.x tossed it)
>
> I am working right now with a windows 2.7 version that I modified for
> VS2010,
> but life would be much easier if we decide to make the compiler transition.
> Because no official 2.8 will exist, this is a fine move.
>
> Also I struggled quite a lot buildin pywin32 for it. With 2.8, this will
> need
> no new special version, but the transition can be very easily done.
> pywin32 decides by
>
>          # vs2008 or vs2010
>          if sys.hexversion < 0x3030000:
>
> which could become
>
>          # vs2008 or vs2010
>          if sys.hexversion < 0x2080000 or sys.hexversion in
> xrange(0x3000000, 0x3030000):
>
> And python 2.8 without stackless is implicitly possible by defining
> STACKLESS_OFF ;-)
>
> Any objections?
>
> all the best - Chris
>
>
> On 06.11.13 21:03, Anselm Kruis wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I agree, that we should continue to support Python 2. Our customers
>> operate large data centers and implement processes using python 2.
>> They won't migrate this code unless there is a very compelling (=
>> saves money) reason.
>>
>> As long as the PSF releases new versions of Python 2.7, we should
>> follow the 2.7 release cycle. This way we can guarantee that Stackless
>> 2.7.x is compatible to C-Python 2.7.x. After the last C-Python
>> release, we can continue to add bug fixes and support for new
>> platforms or OS versions.
>>
>> About a Stackless 2.8: I like the idea, but we should keep a tight
>> rein on it and only accept back-ports of features already in
>> (Stackless-) Python 3.x. Otherwise we won't be able to keep a
>> reasonable quality. And nobody will use a Stackless 2.8, if there is
>> no reasonable migration path to (stackless) python 3.x. But if we add
>> proven 3.x features, a stackless 2.8 could become an attractive option
>> on the way to python 3.
>>
>> About Stackless 3.x: new features - except stackless related ones -
>> should go to C-Python. We don't have enough resources to keep up the
>> quality of the code and - more important - nobody will accept a
>> stackless based solution, if stackless becomes an esoteric and
>> incompatible fork of Python.
>>
>> Regards
>>   Anselm
>>
>> Am 31.10.2013 14:16, schrieb Kristján Valur Jónsson:
>>> Fair enough.
>>> How hard are those to set up?
>>>
>>> 2.8-slp could be branched off when we feel like it.
>>> I could be an enhanced 2.7 with the added benefit of having slp.
>>> There would be no stackless-less 2.8 :)
>>> Of course it will be an absolute bastard in terms of featuritis
>>> unless we keep a tight rein on it :)
>>> K
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: stackless-bounces at stackless.com [mailto:stackless-
>>>> bounces at stackless.com] On Behalf Of Richard Tew
>>>> Sent: 30. október 2013 18:14
>>>> To: The Stackless Python Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [Stackless] Fwd: [Stackless-checkins] stackless
>>>> (2.7-slp): add a
>>>> filter function to zipfile.PyZipFile.
>>>>
>>>> No, let me be clear.  I do not have an opinion about the source
>>>> control.
>>>>
>>>> I am suggesting that Stackless-related discussion stay on this
>>>> mailing list.  It is
>>>> a general topic that covers 2.x and 3.x and does not relate to
>>>> enhancing the
>>>> 2.x line.
>>>>
>>>> And that Python 2.x development go on another mailing list.
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> now I have a good reason for 2.8. I would like to:
>
> - switch compilers on windows to VS2010
>
> - only add features if they are in Python3 as well
>
> - maybe remove bsddb (because 3.x tossed it)
>
> I am working right now with a windows 2.7 version that I modified for
> VS2010,
> but life would be much easier if we decide to make the compiler transition.
> Because no official 2.8 will exist, this is a fine move.
>
> Also I struggled quite a lot buildin pywin32 for it. With 2.8, this will
> need
> no new special version, but the transition can be very easily done.
> pywin32 decides by
>
>          # vs2008 or vs2010
>          if sys.hexversion < 0x3030000:
>
> which could become
>
>          # vs2008 or vs2010
>          if sys.hexversion < 0x2080000 or sys.hexversion in
> xrange(0x3000000, 0x3030000):
>
> And python 2.8 without stackless is implicitly possible by defining
> STACKLESS_OFF ;-)
>
> Any objections?
>
> all the best - Chris
>
>
> On 06.11.13 21:03, Anselm Kruis wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I agree, that we should continue to support Python 2. Our customers
>> operate large data centers and implement processes using python 2.
>> They won't migrate this code unless there is a very compelling (=
>> saves money) reason.
>>
>> As long as the PSF releases new versions of Python 2.7, we should
>> follow the 2.7 release cycle. This way we can guarantee that Stackless
>> 2.7.x is compatible to C-Python 2.7.x. After the last C-Python
>> release, we can continue to add bug fixes and support for new
>> platforms or OS versions.
>>
>> About a Stackless 2.8: I like the idea, but we should keep a tight
>> rein on it and only accept back-ports of features already in
>> (Stackless-) Python 3.x. Otherwise we won't be able to keep a
>> reasonable quality. And nobody will use a Stackless 2.8, if there is
>> no reasonable migration path to (stackless) python 3.x. But if we add
>> proven 3.x features, a stackless 2.8 could become an attractive option
>> on the way to python 3.
>>
>> About Stackless 3.x: new features - except stackless related ones -
>> should go to C-Python. We don't have enough resources to keep up the
>> quality of the code and - more important - nobody will accept a
>> stackless based solution, if stackless becomes an esoteric and
>> incompatible fork of Python.
>>
>> Regards
>>   Anselm
>>
>> Am 31.10.2013 14:16, schrieb Kristján Valur Jónsson:
>>> Fair enough.
>>> How hard are those to set up?
>>>
>>> 2.8-slp could be branched off when we feel like it.
>>> I could be an enhanced 2.7 with the added benefit of having slp.
>>> There would be no stackless-less 2.8 :)
>>> Of course it will be an absolute bastard in terms of featuritis
>>> unless we keep a tight rein on it :)
>>> K
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: stackless-bounces at stackless.com [mailto:stackless-
>>>> bounces at stackless.com] On Behalf Of Richard Tew
>>>> Sent: 30. október 2013 18:14
>>>> To: The Stackless Python Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [Stackless] Fwd: [Stackless-checkins] stackless
>>>> (2.7-slp): add a
>>>> filter function to zipfile.PyZipFile.
>>>>
>>>> No, let me be clear.  I do not have an opinion about the source
>>>> control.
>>>>
>>>> I am suggesting that Stackless-related discussion stay on this
>>>> mailing list.  It is
>>>> a general topic that covers 2.x and 3.x and does not relate to
>>>> enhancing the
>>>> 2.x line.
>>>>
>>>> And that Python 2.x development go on another mailing list.
>
> --
> Christian Tismer             :^)<mailto:tismer at stackless.com>
> Software Consulting          :     Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
> Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121     :    *Starship*http://starship.python.net/
> 14482 Potsdam                :     PGP key ->http://pgp.uni-mainz.de
> phone +49 173 24 18 776  fax +49 (30) 700143-0023
> PGP 0x57F3BF04       9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619  305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
>        whom do you want to sponsor today?http://www.stackless.com/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stackless mailing list
> Stackless at stackless.com
> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
>

-- 
  Dipl. Phys. Anselm Kruis                       science + computing ag
  Senior Solution Architect                      Ingolstädter Str. 22
  email A.Kruis at science-computing.de             80807 München, Germany
  phone +49 89 356386 874  fax 737               www.science-computing.de
-- 
Vorstandsvorsitzender/Chairman of the board of management:
Gerd-Lothar Leonhart
Vorstand/Board of Management:
Dr. Bernd Finkbeiner, Michael Heinrichs, 
Dr. Arno Steitz, Dr. Ingrid Zech
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats/
Chairman of the Supervisory Board:
Philippe Miltin
Sitz/Registered Office: Tuebingen
Registergericht/Registration Court: Stuttgart
Registernummer/Commercial Register No.: HRB 382196




More information about the Stackless mailing list