[Stackless] stacklesslib & tealet

Tue Jan 7 14:33:53 CET 2014

Hi Werner,

just a note to this old thread:

Right now the idea of stackless as an add-on to Python is deferred and 
replaced
by the current direction of having a separate, stand-alone package.

This is just to close this thread so far.

We are no longer bending over to collaborate with an existing python, 
but try to
be a compatible alternative with some optional additions.

cheers - Chris

On 01/05/13 12:19, Werner Thie wrote:
> Hi Christian
>
> From what I recall, I asked in previous mail if there is a naming 
> convention in place which would allow to keep stackless apart from 
> stock installations, like the OSX one.
>
> AFAIR the main swing was for some time, use stackless in lieu of 
> python, whereas now it seems to be keep things apart.
>
> I'm fine with keeping things apart, no opposition on my side and with 
> a different naming for the package and the executable we might even 
> pass the tests for becoming a brew instead of a tap
>
> Werner
>
> PS: BTW - homebrew is NOT replacing stock python, it does a separate 
> install in /usr/local, with the executables name also being 'python', 
> which means whatever PATH you have set, it either takes the stackless 
> or the stock one. Eclipse's PyDev does a great job keeping several 
> python's apart as well as virtualenv
>
>
> On 4/30/13 8:00 PM, Christian Tismer wrote:
>> Hi Werner,
>>
>> On 4/30/13 5:32 PM, Werner Thie wrote:
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> Concerning the Mac OSX version, I still have that brew recipe? As a
>>> tap it would probably have a life in the home brew environment.
>>>
>>> Concerning the problems with several Python version installed on a Mac
>>> the home brew approach is by far the cleanest I found.
>>>
>>> All we need is tarball on the official site with an MD5 digest, form
>>> there its only
>>>
>>> brew install stackless
>>>
>>> Anyone favoring this approach?
>>
>> I saw your post to the list from July 2012. At that time I was not yet
>> using Homebrew,
>> but meanwhile I am.
>> Here my opinion:
>>
>> - Homebrew does a quite good job when you need a certain package.
>>     It is also what I use on OS X, instead of using canned builds from
>> python.org.
>>
>> - I had a closer look at your version for Stackless, and that is
>> unfortunately
>>     exactly what I don't want, with any installer, be it one like
>> python.org's, your's, or
>>     anything else that installs Stackless Python as a replacement of
>> regular Python.
>>
>> That is not the problem to be solved. We had such solutions since 1998,
>> and this was
>> the wrong approch, all the time.
>>
>> I am meanwhile convinced that it is a bad idea to have an installer for
>> Stackless Python
>> that replaces CPython by using the same folder and name for the 
>> executable.
>>
>> Don't be offended, I have no objection if you modify your Homebrew
>> Stackless installer
>> and name the executable different from Python, so they can co-exist. So
>> please feel free to
>> try again to get into the Homebrew distro, do exactly what they do for
>> Python and Python3,
>> but avoid giving it the name Python or Python3.
>>
>> I think my answers to two different threads were not clear enough, so I
>> should be a bit
>> clearer about what is needed.
>>
>> The approach that Anselm and me want to push further is a bit more than
>> an installer:
>> Instead of downloading and installing a different version, the idea is
>> to install
>> Stackless on top of an existing CPython of an exact version, and install
>> the Stackless
>> addition as an extension-like add-on, although that is cheating, because
>> we still
>> need to replace the interpreter.
>> For that reason, I also still am in favor of naming the stackless
>> interpreter slightly differently,
>> although it can and should share as much as possible from the original
>> installation.
>>
>> The point is to get people into trying stackless as an alternative,
>> without destroying their
>> CPython installation. Stackless needs to play nicely, like an extension
>> that you can toss if
>> it does not fit your needs.
>>
>> If you think it makes sense to use homebrew for this, then I'm
>> interested to read your
>> thoughts. But yet another installer is neither on the problems nor on
>> the solutions side
>> of what the topic was in the other thread you are referring to.
>>
>> I want Stackless to be (almost) as simple as Greenlet to install.
>>
>> Cheers -- Chris
>>
>>>
>>>> To all:
>>>>
>>>> I think we should try to discuss a road map for Stackless, where the
>>>> journey
>>>> should go in the future.
>>>>
>>>> What is the best way to set up a discussion? Does the stackless list
>>>> suffice
>>>> for that, or is it better to use some Google groups stuff?
>>>
>>> -1 for Google groups or
>>> rather positive
>>> +1 for the list, it is more than sufficient for me
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Stackless mailing list
>>> Stackless at stackless.com
>>> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stackless mailing list
> Stackless at stackless.com
> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless

-- 
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/