[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
Tue Nov 12 12:57:36 CET 2013


Hi Christian,

let's stay with mercurial, at least as long as C-Python uses this 
system. It simplifies merging changes back and forth.

There is already a project on bitbucket that mirrors stackless 
(https://bitbucket.org/python_mirrors/stackless/overview), but the 
project stopped updating the mirror last May.

Cheers
   Anselm

Am 12.11.2013 12:12, schrieb Christian Tismer:
> Hi Anselm,
>
> agreed, good idea.
> What do people prefer? bitbucked or github?
> The latter is better manageable, I like git much better, meanwhile.
> But the move of the repository is a PITA, so probably answering myself:
>
> For getting started really quick, it should be bitbucket. I will create
> stackless there.
> For later, a git version on either github or bitbucket might be discussed.
>
> But I want that thing ready this week, right? ;-)
>
> Will try to write the policy, first.
>
> cheers - chris
>
>
> On 11.11.13 20:51, Anselm Kruis wrote:
>> 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