From: Graham H. <gjh...@be...> - 2011-07-07 13:06:05
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Sorry for slight hiatus in responding, email client problems here (sigh) On 7 Jul 2011, at 11:05, Christoph Zwerschke wrote: > Am 07.07.2011 00:04 schrieb Ian Bicking: >> I ended up reverting that change because it also broke tests, and >> once I >> looked at it I didn't understand the purpose anyway. Not that I mind >> dropping 2.3 support ;) > > Since the 2to3 patch by Graham Higgins also requires Py 2.4, dropping > 2.3 support would be a step forward I think. For completeness, I'd have preferred to have 2.3 coverage but ... The omission of 2.3 was simply (but significantly) because I couldn't get the official tarball to compile on ubuntu natty - which otherwise provides distro package support for 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 3.1 and 3.2. There's a separate, individually-maintained "deadsnakes" ppa which provides a suitable 2.4 package (bless their little cotton socks) but for 2.3 one is left with the "./configure && make" option - which blows out on both my laptop and the server. Obviously, a CentOS 4 VM would likely do the trick but even at that the relentless march of time means that supporting 2.3 is edging towards becoming disproportionately expensive in maintenance terms. > If we drop it, I am willing to go through the code and simplify it > based > on Py 2.4 (use decorators etc.) There's a current GSOC project aimed at porting webob to Python 3. The project kicked off with a test sprint aimed at achieving 100% test coverage, considered to be a highly desirable precondition for a robust port and also no bad thing in itself. I suspect formencode would similarly benefit from extended test coverage. It took 'em three days, mind. > But I suggest creating a final 1.2.5 release with Py 2.3 support > before > doing this and then having a 1.3 which requires Py 2.4 after the > overhaul, maybe already with Graham's patch. Makes a lot of sense to me, fwiw. My perspective here is enlightened self-interest (as a formencode user) and a respect for formencode's extensive existing i18n .po coverage, an aspect whose importance is sometimes severely under-appreciated by native English speaking developers (though I note this is definitely not true of Ian). And I've seen a few "formencode is dead, it isn't being supported" misperceptions being bruited about on IRC. I'd certainly be prepared to set up another CI job to track and support a development repository if that's perceived as a useful contribution. I'll also pitch in with the coding where I can (I'm a cognitive psychologist by trade, not a pro coder). Cheers, Graham Higgins -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEARECAAYFAk4VqmQACgkQOsmLt1NhivwrJQCgtGdOuHlx/NjWiTURq1Yf8qZA 58AAnj7skEfOrLICnvVc5ZZCr+p/XTKoiQCVAgUBThWqZFnrWVZ7aXD1AQLWlgQA yTx+z1bFpYzfxkMTQwwH5LDhbQr7O7ZSaP3J4MvDejnNqYQ7VvTKvM/+W9gSGT9G EqrF+3vT459Go3blYyI+Q2QpBQl8CAOsZvVPa3ufuPUpGpwuAtk8iFTxEYMusqmT RHJYxP8wdh8XTEe523L0px0uzOFRhQFc7N8HFTft78Y= =i4gu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |