Roundup Issue Tracker

Bernhard Reiter <bernhard@...> writes:

> on the development list we are discussing to drop the support
> for Python 2.4 for future roundup versions.

Hooray! I hope it can invigorate Roundup development, by making it
easier to use less-ancient Python features :-)

-- 
 \             “We can't depend for the long run on distinguishing one |
  `\         bitstream from another in order to figure out which rules |
_o__)               apply.” —Eben Moglen, _Anarchism Triumphant_, 1999 |
Ben Finney

Hello everyone,

Ben Finney schrieb am Samstag, den 25.02.2012 um 22:20:
> Bernhard Reiter <bernhard@...> writes:
> 
> > on the development list we are discussing to drop the support
> > for Python 2.4 for future roundup versions.
> 
> Hooray! I hope it can invigorate Roundup development, by making it
> easier to use less-ancient Python features :-)

Just curious:  which particular Python features missing from 
Python 2.4 do you need so desperately?
standard library or core language?

I had a look at 
    http://www.python.org/getit/releases/2.5/highlights/
May be I am to old to see the ground breaking advances in
this particular version beside the bug fixes.  Especially 
the added "with" is in my opinion something better avoided 
for the sake of code readability.

Best regards,
Peter Funk
P.S.: BTW: Here in our company in a certain part of some
software we didn't drop support for Python 1.5.2 until last year.  
This was a huge step forward!  e.g. String methods ;-)  
-- 
Peter Funk, home: ✉Oldenburger Str.86, D-27777 Ganderkesee
mobile:+49-179-640-8878 phone:+49-421-20419-0 <http://www.artcom-gmbh.de/>
office: ArtCom GmbH, ✉Haferwende 2, D-28357 Bremen, Germany
DRUPA 3.5.-16.5.2012: Besuchen Sie uns in Halle 4 auf Stand B02

Peter Funk <pf@...> writes:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Ben Finney schrieb am Samstag, den 25.02.2012 um 22:20:
> > Hooray! I hope it can invigorate Roundup development, by making it
> > easier to use less-ancient Python features :-)
>
> Just curious: which particular Python features missing from Python 2.4
> do you need so desperately?

No-one said anything about being desperate for anything. Why raise that
straw man?

Since Python 2.4 is no longer a supported version by the Python project,
the burden is on the other side: unsupported versions should be dropped
by default, and only retained if there is a compelling need for them,
and only so long as that reason remains compelling.

-- 
 \              “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against |
  `\       unintelligible propositions.” —Thomas Jefferson, 1816-07-30 |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Ben Finney wrote:
> Since Python 2.4 is no longer a supported version by the Python project,
> the burden is on the other side: unsupported versions should be dropped
> by default, and only retained if there is a compelling need for them,
> and only so long as that reason remains compelling.

I work on other Python projects that have 2.4 as a base requirement. This
is rational for our situation, since I want to support those projects on
computers running RHEL/CentOS 5.x, which ships with Python 2.4.3.

I occasionally encounter situations where a "new in Python 2.6" function
would be handy, but not essential. I also run into situations where the
handling of some specific functions changed between Python 2.4 and 2.5
(hashlib, for example), but those situations are trivial to work around.
Three cheers for unittesting.

While Roundup switching to require a more modern Python does not personally
affect me, I could see how it might adversely affect users in a more
restrictive hosting situation.

I think the original question posed remains valid: what will Roundup gain
by moving from Python 2.4 to 2.5? If the effort required to stay at 2.4
is trivial (especially since you would still need to test releases on
2.5, 2.6, and 2.7), why bother?

--Kyle

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 01:51:24PM +0100, Peter Funk wrote:
> Just curious:  which particular Python features missing from 
> Python 2.4 do you need so desperately?
> standard library or core language?

The email related libs have changed a lot. We *are* currently
maintaining some backward-compatibility lib that tries to make this work
for various versions of python but this is currently broken for 2.4 and
the time to fix it could be invested for other things.

Ralf

-- 
Dr. Ralf Schlatterbeck                  Tel:   +43/2243/26465-16
Open Source Consulting                  www:   http://www.runtux.com
Reichergasse 131, A-3411 Weidling       email: office@...
osAlliance member                       email: rsc@...

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 06:04:06AM -0800, Kyle Lanclos wrote:

> While Roundup switching to require a more modern Python does not personally
> affect me, I could see how it might adversely affect users in a more
> restrictive hosting situation.
> 
> I think the original question posed remains valid: what will Roundup gain
> by moving from Python 2.4 to 2.5? If the effort required to stay at 2.4
> is trivial (especially since you would still need to test releases on
> 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7), why bother?

2.4 regression tests are broken for some time (some email features).
So if nobody steps up who is affected personally I tend to drop support
for 2.4... on the other hand if somebody wants to submit patches for
making 2.4 run again, these are welcome.

Ralf
-- 
Dr. Ralf Schlatterbeck                  Tel:   +43/2243/26465-16
Open Source Consulting                  www:   http://www.runtux.com
Reichergasse 131, A-3411 Weidling       email: office@...
osAlliance member                       email: rsc@...

Ralf Schlatterbeck schrieb am Sonntag, den 26.02.2012 um 17:43:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 06:04:06AM -0800, Kyle Lanclos wrote:
> 
> > While Roundup switching to require a more modern Python does not personally
> > affect me, I could see how it might adversely affect users in a more
> > restrictive hosting situation.
> > 
> > I think the original question posed remains valid: what will Roundup gain
> > by moving from Python 2.4 to 2.5? If the effort required to stay at 2.4
> > is trivial (especially since you would still need to test releases on
> > 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7), why bother?
> 
> 2.4 regression tests are broken for some time (some email features).
> So if nobody steps up who is affected personally I tend to drop support
> for 2.4... on the other hand if somebody wants to submit patches for
> making 2.4 run again, these are welcome.

Now I understand.  Thank you for explaining.

Viele Grüße and Regards,
Peter Funk
-- 
Peter Funk, home: ✉Oldenburger Str.86, D-27777 Ganderkesee
mobile:+49-179-640-8878 phone:+49-421-20419-0 <http://www.artcom-gmbh.de/>
office: ArtCom GmbH, ✉Haferwende 2, D-28357 Bremen, Germany
DRUPA 3.5.-16.5.2012: Besuchen Sie uns in Halle 4 auf Stand B02