Webware for Python

On Aug 21, 2006, at 8:35 PM, Christoph Zwerschke wrote:

> I think I'm now done with this round of bug fixing. Webware should now
> install and run with all Python versions from 2.0 to 2.5 as claimed by
> the Docs and the Property files (at least all the unit tests pass);  
> and
> I tested it on some more platforms.
>
> The 0.9.2 beta release will be available in one or two days. But I  
> feel
> this should be the last release to support such old Python versions.
>
> What do you suggest as the minimum Python version required when Python
> 2.5 is available? I think requiring Python 2.3 would be fair. This  
> would
> allow removing a lot of backward compatibility hacks and more  
> efficient
> and modern coding.
>
> -- Christoph

I would put my two cents on version 2.3, but only because 2.4 does  
not run on older OS's like Fedora Core 1 and 2.

That said, as long a Webware 0.9.2 is kept on the web site for  
downloading, moving to python 2.4 and above may simplify future work.

Mark Phillips

Hallo,
Mark Phillips hat gesagt: // Mark Phillips wrote:

> I would put my two cents on version 2.3, but only because 2.4 does  
> not run on older OS's like Fedora Core 1 and 2.
 
One important "older OS" to me and I guess to many others is Debian
stable, which is in use on many webservers out there. I would like to
see Webware not require any Python that is not in Debian stable at the
time of release. Currently that is 2.3 at most. Debian's Python
packages for "stable" are listed here:
http://packages.debian.org/stable/python/ 

Ciao
-- 
 Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__

Hallo,
Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote:

> One important "older OS" to me and I guess to many others is Debian
> stable, which is in use on many webservers out there. I would like to
> see Webware not require any Python that is not in Debian stable at the
> time of release. Currently that is 2.3 at most.

Sorry, typo: It's 2.4 in Debian stable of course.

Ciao
-- 
 Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__

Frank Barknecht wrote:
> One important "older OS" to me and I guess to many others is Debian
> stable, which is in use on many webservers out there. I would like to
> see Webware not require any Python that is not in Debian stable at the
> time of release.

The same applies to the Enterprise distributions like RHEL or SLES which
always lag behind. SLES 10 with Python 2.4 is only available since one
month or so. Maybe we can go with 2.4 anyway. It would help a lot.

Another idea: Maybe we should couple the move to Python 2.4 with finally
jumping to Webware 1.0. We could then also remove all deprecated stuff,
and maybe even move to something like easy_install for the installer.
Bugfixes could still be done in the 0.9.x branch.

-- Christoph

Christoph Zwerschke wrote:
> I noticed that after July 5, there are no checkin notificatons on 
> webware-checkins-bounces@... any more, though I have 
> made some checkins to the Webware repository recently.
> 
> I have already looked on the server but found no changes in the config 
> or error messages. Any ideas?

That's odd, I'm getting email from some locations from that same box. 
Are you making checkins someplace that is configured to send to that 
address?

-- 
Ian Bicking | ianb@... | http://blog.ianbicking.org

Ian Bicking wrote:
> That's odd, I'm getting email from some locations from that same box. 
> Are you making checkins someplace that is configured to send to that 
> address?

Yes, but I think I have found the problem: The exim process did not run 
any more. I found the following in the messages file:

Jul 18 19:52:07 webware kernel: VM: killing process exim
Aug  7 19:32:36 webware kernel: VM: killing process exim
Aug  8 11:55:55 webware kernel: VM: killing process exim3
Aug  8 12:06:32 webware kernel: VM: killing process exim3

I have restarted exim now.

The messages file is also full of these error messages:

  webware kernel: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (gfp=0x1d2/0)

Seems the server has serious memory problems.

-- Chris

On 8/11/06, Christoph Zwerschke <cito@...> wrote:
> Can I remove the SelectRelease module in the WebKit package? It seems it
> was only used by the AsyncThreadedAppServer which has gone already.
>
> -- Christoph

No objections here.

Chuck Esterbrook wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Christoph Zwerschke <cito@...> wrote:
>> Can I remove the SelectRelease module in the WebKit package? It seems it
>> was only used by the AsyncThreadedAppServer which has gone already.
> 
> No objections here.

There are also WebKit/Experimental and WebKit/Research folders which do 
not look as if they should be part of the distribution. Can I remove 
them from the repository, too? I can also move it together to one folder 
that will be excluded from the release archive. Any other junk that 
should be cleaned away in the next release?