[Stackless] Stackless 2.8 layout (or stackless python 404)

Christian Tismer tismer at stackless.com
Mon Nov 25 05:13:07 CET 2013

Hi Richard,

just a few preliminary comments:

On 24.11.13 22:12, Richard Tew wrote:
> ...

> Policy change for Python:
> ---------------------
> We do not mention python explicitly in documentation for stackless 2.8.
> I think this goes too far.  We are primarily the Python programming
> language, but with a bit extra.  To deny reference to Python does more
> harm than good IMO.

I did not mean to avoig the name "Python". I meant avoiding the name
"Python 2.8". This was unclear (as I always am), and I think to write a
"STEP, that we can edit and refine until it converges.

> We include the un-modified documentation for python 2.7.
> Can I suggest an alternate approach.  We use the name "Stackless 2.8",
> and we leave all Python references in the Stackless documentation.
> However, we put a header in the template with a short statement making
> it clear that this is not Python 2.8, and a link to further
> information.  This should override any reasonable chance of accidental
> confusion where other pages might automatically have the combined
> words "Python 2.8".

Not sure if I understood this. My intent was to cleanly avoid any reference
to "python" and "2.8". If the docu is based upon current docs, I think
this goesautomatically, unless there are computed strings.
>> All additions/extension/modifications are documented in extra documents
>> called "stackless-news" and "stackless-readme".
> Sounds fine.
> The tricking people to use Stackless isn't the way I would prefer we
> go about it.  If it were up to me, I would just keep it simple.  I
> would not #ifdef back-ported 3.x features.  I would have it build
> "notpython 2.8" if STACKESS_OFF was defined.  If people wanted to get
> involved and help back port features to an updated version of 2.7,
> they could do so and use it as a non-stackless python.  We wouldn't
> provide binaries for "notpython 2.8", and if people wanted to get a
> properly supported 2.8, they'd simply migrate to the supported
> "stackless 2.8".

Not sure about that.
It was bad wording - I don't want to trick people. But I want them to
use Stackless as a replacement for Python, I admit. So I no longer think to
add "stackless" as something, but give them the combined packages,
at least on Windows. I would like to have it all in the same folder, with
the same library, but "stackless.exe" and "stacklessw.exe" and 
"python.exe" and
"pythonw.exe", in the same folder. People should install that instead of
CPython from python.org, and further install PySide and pywin32 to start 
And those packages are binary compatible (in my version).
That means you use "stackless -m pip pyside" which installs the unique,
compatible PySide for both Stackless and Python installed just once.

If we disagree here, then I can add a special branch for this, no problem.

> Other than that, the rest of the post sounds fine.

Well, I think to not continue with that document here in public, but to
create an extra repo on BB, where we edit and refine it until it is ok.
I'll put that together, tomorrow, and we discuss how to proceed.

cheers - Chris

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/

More information about the Stackless mailing list