FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-24-2010, 04:53 PM
Sebastian Beßler
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

Am 24.03.2010 18:45, schrieb Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis:
> 2010-03-24 18:32:37 Joshua Saddler napisał(a):
>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:14:44 +0100
>> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <Arfrever@gentoo.org> wrote:

>>> Some Gentoo developers/users, who aren't Python maintainers, said that
>>> they didn't object to have Python 3 installed.
>>
>> They're in the minority, judging by the replies in this thread.
>
> People, who don't object to given suggestions, less often reply to them.
>

I am only a user and read this thread for quite some time.
Because I use ~amd64 I already had python 3 on my screen to install. I
knew that I don't need it and don't want it so I put it into
package.mask. No harm done.
I really don't see where the problem is at all.

Publish a news message and let all users decide, package.mask is no
black magic or rocket science .

Just my 2 cent

Greetings

Sebastian
 
Old 03-24-2010, 04:58 PM
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

2010-03-23 20:57:33 Jonathan Callen napisał(a):
> On 03/23/2010 03:13 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> > I'm attaching updated news item, which will be committed soon.
> >
>
> A couple grammar issues:
>
> -modules, which support both Python 2 and Python 3, are installed for both
> -active version of Python 2 and active version of Python 3, when both Python 2
> -and Python 3 are installed.
> +modules that support both Python 2 and Python 3 are installed for both the
> +active version of Python 2 and the active version of Python 3 when both
> +Python 2 and Python 3 are installed.

I have locally applied these changes some hours ago, but I'm attaching updated
news item so that it can be reviewed easier. If there are no additional, new
suggestions, then the news item will be committed tomorrow.

--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Title: Python 3.1
Author: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <Arfrever@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2010-03-24
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: =dev-lang/python-3.1*

Python 3 is a new major version of Python and is intentionally incompatible
with Python 2. Many external modules have not been ported yet to Python 3,
so Python 2 still needs to be installed. You can benefit from having Python 3
installed without setting Python 3.1 as main active version of Python.
Currently you should not set Python 3.1 as main active version of Python.
When setting it becomes recommended, a separate news item will be created
to notify users.

Although Python 3.1 should not be set as main active version of Python,
you should run python-updater after installation of Python 3.1. By default,
modules that support both Python 2 and Python 3 are installed for both
the active version of Python 2 and the active version of Python 3 when both
Python 2 and Python 3 are installed.

It is recommended to use a UTF-8 locale to avoid potential problems. Especially
C and POSIX locales are discouraged. If locale has not been explicitly set,
then POSIX locale is used, so you should ensure that locale has been set.
Problems occurring only with non-UTF-8 locales should be reported directly
to upstream developers of given packages.
See http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/utf-8.xml for more information about UTF-8.
 
Old 03-24-2010, 05:03 PM
William Hubbs
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 05:47:18PM +0000, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:32:37 -0700, Joshua Saddler <nightmorph@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> >> > But everyone else in Gentoo does, so . . .

Really? I've seen a few people object, but not everyone in gentoo.

> >>
> >> Some Gentoo developers/users, who aren't Python maintainers, said that
> >> they didn't object to have Python 3 installed.
> >
> > They're in the minority, judging by the replies in this thread.
>
> I hate to get into the mix of this, but I suggest researching on "vocal
> minority" and/or "silent majority" - the most vocal ones on this thread are
> the minority of the population. I'm not attacking anyone, mind you.
>
> I haven't expressed anything on this thread but I'm ok with marking it
> stable and having concerned users mask it. The stages might get kinda funky
> with both python-2 and 3 on them, but..if they are not BROKEN, I don't
> care.

I tend to agree with this. I don't think it is right to force everyone
to wait until most of the tree works with python3 before it goes stable.
That is why python is slotted; it is possible to have both versions
installed at the same time. If we have packages in the tree that are
pulling in both versions of python but are not compatible with them,
their dependencies need to be fixed. If users do not want python-3 on
their systems, that is what /etc/portage/package.mask is for.

If we are going to make everyone wait until python-3 works with most
packages in the tree, let's un-slot all versionf of python and hard mask
python-3.

William
 
Old 03-24-2010, 05:04 PM
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

2010-03-24 18:51:48 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. napisał(a):
> On 3/24/10 6:35 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> >> All valid concerns about text already included in the news item have been
> >> addressed. We don't need to include any unofficial recommendations.
> >
> > I'll take that as a yes then, you are indeed disregarding the concerns
> > and recommendations of your fellow Gentoo developers.
> >
> > CC'ing devrel because this is getting out of hand.
>
> I think it's a purely technical issue. The arguments against Python 3
> are mostly in the form "I don't feel it's ready". If it can't be
> resolved on the list (some people want Python 3, some don't), shouldn't
> the council decide?

People, don't want Python 3, probably have already masked it. There is
no reason to waste Council's time for decision on what sentence should
be included in the news item.

--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Old 03-24-2010, 05:28 PM
Joshua Saddler
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:04:51 +0100
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <Arfrever@gentoo.org> wrote:
> People, don't want Python 3, probably have already masked it. There is
> no reason to waste Council's time for decision on what sentence should
> be included in the news item.

Not the folks running the stable tree, because they don't know about it. They're not following the discussion here on -dev. They're going to get unpleasantly surprised when it shows up in their next world update.

Include instructions on how to mask it if desired in the news item.
 
Old 03-24-2010, 05:41 PM
Richard Freeman
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

On 03/24/2010 02:28 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote:

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:04:51 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar
Arahesis<Arfrever@gentoo.org> wrote:

People, don't want Python 3, probably have already masked it. There
is no reason to waste Council's time for decision on what sentence
should be included in the news item.


Not the folks running the stable tree, because they don't know about
it. They're not following the discussion here on -dev. They're going
to get unpleasantly surprised when it shows up in their next world
update.

Include instructions on how to mask it if desired in the news item.


Will not masking python-3 cause anything to break in any way? Do users
need to do anything to make python-2.6 or whatever the default
interpreter (instructions for using eselect python are not given in the
news item)?


If the only potential issue is that users might have a few extra files
installed that they don't need but which won't cause them problems, then
I don't know that we need to instruct users to create masks.


If having python-3 will cause stable users problems, then we probably
shouldn't be stabilizing it anyway.


Compared to the KDE 3->4 migration this is probably going to be a fairly
minor issue for most stable users, unless we're expecting breakage.


Rich
 
Old 03-24-2010, 05:55 PM
Ben de Groot
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

On 24 March 2010 19:41, Richard Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 03/24/2010 02:28 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:04:51 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar
>> Arahesis<Arfrever@gentoo.org> *wrote:
>>>
>>> People, don't want Python 3, probably have already masked it. There
>>> is no reason to waste Council's time for decision on what sentence
>>> should be included in the news item.
>>
>> Not the folks running the stable tree, because they don't know about
>> it. They're not following the discussion here on -dev. They're going
>> to get unpleasantly surprised when it shows up in their next world
>> update.
>>
>> Include instructions on how to mask it if desired in the news item.
>
> Will not masking python-3 cause anything to break in any way? *Do users need
> to do anything to make python-2.6 or whatever the default interpreter
> (instructions for using eselect python are not given in the news item)?
>
> If the only potential issue is that users might have a few extra files
> installed that they don't need but which won't cause them problems, then I
> don't know that we need to instruct users to create masks.
>
> If having python-3 will cause stable users problems, then we probably
> shouldn't be stabilizing it anyway.
>
> Compared to the KDE 3->4 migration this is probably going to be a fairly
> minor issue for most stable users, unless we're expecting breakage.
>
> Rich

Did you even read the whole thread? And the other one named
"Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it"?


--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux Qt project lead developer
 
Old 03-24-2010, 05:57 PM
William Hubbs
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 02:41:28PM -0400, Richard Freeman wrote:
> On 03/24/2010 02:28 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:04:51 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar
> > Arahesis<Arfrever@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> People, don't want Python 3, probably have already masked it. There
> >> is no reason to waste Council's time for decision on what sentence
> >> should be included in the news item.
> >
> > Not the folks running the stable tree, because they don't know about
> > it. They're not following the discussion here on -dev. They're going
> > to get unpleasantly surprised when it shows up in their next world
> > update.
> >
> > Include instructions on how to mask it if desired in the news item.
>
> Will not masking python-3 cause anything to break in any way? Do users
> need to do anything to make python-2.6 or whatever the default
> interpreter (instructions for using eselect python are not given in the
> news item)?

I'm not the python maintainer, but as I understand it,python-2.6 will
be the default interpretor until it is changed manually.

> If the only potential issue is that users might have a few extra files
> installed that they don't need but which won't cause them problems, then
> I don't know that we need to instruct users to create masks.

AFAIK, this is the issue. If python-3 is installed, it will cause
extra files to be installed, not justin python-3, but any packages that
support both python-2 and python-3 will potentially get files installed
for both versions of python.

> If having python-3 will cause stable users problems, then we probably
> shouldn't be stabilizing it anyway.

AFAIK, the only "problem" we are debating about is the extra files
being installed.

William
 
Old 03-24-2010, 06:53 PM
Duncan
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

William Hubbs posted on Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:03:34 -0500 as excerpted:

> If users do not want python-3 on
> their systems, that is what /etc/portage/package.mask is for.

I think pretty much everyone agrees with that. What we're debating is
whether the stabling news item should specifically mention package.mask as
an option before it goes stable.

Fortunately or unfortunately, despite the stated Gentoo policy of
"documentation but not hand holding", stable Gentoo users are in fact used
to having a bit of extra hand-holding and have come to expect it. While
the generally given reason for said hand-holding is that we're simply
avoiding the flood of bugs we'd otherwise get, and arguably that doesn't
apply in this case (arguably, because there are still and will be new
python dependency bugs that this will trigger), it's an expectation stable
users have come to have, and failing to specifically mention the
package.mask option violates this expectation.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
 
Old 03-24-2010, 06:57 PM
Thomas Sachau
 
Default Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item

Am 24.03.2010 19:03, schrieb William Hubbs:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 05:47:18PM +0000, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:32:37 -0700, Joshua Saddler <nightmorph@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>> But everyone else in Gentoo does, so . . .
>
> Really? I've seen a few people object, but not everyone in gentoo.
>
>>>>
>>>> Some Gentoo developers/users, who aren't Python maintainers, said that
>>>> they didn't object to have Python 3 installed.
>>>
>>> They're in the minority, judging by the replies in this thread.
>>
>> I hate to get into the mix of this, but I suggest researching on "vocal
>> minority" and/or "silent majority" - the most vocal ones on this thread are
>> the minority of the population. I'm not attacking anyone, mind you.
>>
>> I haven't expressed anything on this thread but I'm ok with marking it
>> stable and having concerned users mask it. The stages might get kinda funky
>> with both python-2 and 3 on them, but..if they are not BROKEN, I don't
>> care.
>
> I tend to agree with this. I don't think it is right to force everyone
> to wait until most of the tree works with python3 before it goes stable.
> That is why python is slotted; it is possible to have both versions
> installed at the same time. If we have packages in the tree that are
> pulling in both versions of python but are not compatible with them,
> their dependencies need to be fixed. If users do not want python-3 on
> their systems, that is what /etc/portage/package.mask is for.
>
> If we are going to make everyone wait until python-3 works with most
> packages in the tree, let's un-slot all versionf of python and hard mask
> python-3.
>
> William
>

Who said, that we are against a stable python-3 version?

The main point (as already pointed out in my previous thread about python-3) is, that it is not in
any way required or used. But there are still wrong dependencies (where Arfrever just closes bugs as
invalid) and packages like the mentioned "setuptools", which will always pull in python-3.

Why should we pull in python-3 for ever user, force the usual user to install a useless python-3 and
additional files in python-3 path for many python packages? The minimum would be to tell them, that
this python version is currently useless and they have the option to mask it locally. And i really
dont think, that the default stable user knows, that python-3 is not really needed and can be
masked, usually the pulled in dependencies are required, so he will expect the same for python-3.

--
Thomas Sachau

Gentoo Linux Developer
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:15 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org