Re: Python 3 support
- Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org To: Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org Cc: LilyPond Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 2:39 PM Subject: Re: Python 3 support Sure. I am not involved with GUB or the GitHub repos. So the question what to use for LilyPond is likely mostly up to Phil. -- David Kastrup I use the gperciva repo. 2.18.2 is now out and AFAIK should be the final 2.18 build. That's fairly irrelevant, though, since I can try updated GUB versions using a snapshot of the VM. I'm in the middle of a busy time at college right now, but over Easter I could try some updates, if talked through what needs doing. -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes: - Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org To: Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org Cc: LilyPond Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 2:39 PM Subject: Re: Python 3 support Sure. I am not involved with GUB or the GitHub repos. So the question what to use for LilyPond is likely mostly up to Phil. -- David Kastrup I use the gperciva repo. 2.18.2 is now out and AFAIK should be the final 2.18 build. That's fairly irrelevant, though, since I can try updated GUB versions using a snapshot of the VM. I'm in the middle of a busy time at college right now, but over Easter I could try some updates, if talked through what needs doing. Well, the week up to and including Easter I'll be at my yearly climbing trip and probably not overly helpful. But then I am not likely to be overly helpful regarding GUB anyway. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 04:41:46PM -0400, Julien Rioux wrote: I think the following would be a good 1-2 punch approach for the current development cycle: First, upgrade python in GUB and make sure we can build current dev and stable branches of lilypond from it. Then bump the python requirement in the dev branch and start migrating to a codebase that supports python 2.6+ and python 3+ Sounds great! Thanks for working on this. I was of the opinion that GUB already uses Python 2.6? -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: I was of the opinion that GUB already uses Python 2.6? GUB master at https://github.com/gperciva/gub (the current official home) definitely does not use python 2.6. It ships python 2.4.5 If you are using GUB master at https://github.com/janneke/gub then it does use python 2.6, but it lacks the fix for python's hashlib module, which then fails to import at run time. I added that fix and a couple others in the previously mentioned pull request. (BTW moving GUB to a user-agnostic home such as https://github.com/lilypondwould make sense to avoid such confusion. After Jan went mostly inactive, Graham took over as the official home, but he is now himself going into inactivity) Regards, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org writes: On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: I was of the opinion that GUB already uses Python 2.6? GUB master at https://github.com/gperciva/gub (the current official home) definitely does not use python 2.6. It ships python 2.4.5 Oh. I thought we had moved back to: If you are using GUB master at https://github.com/janneke/gub then it does use python 2.6, but it lacks the fix for python's hashlib module, which then fails to import at run time. I added that fix and a couple others in the previously mentioned pull request. (BTW moving GUB to a user-agnostic home such as https://github.com/lilypond would make sense to avoid such confusion. After Jan went mostly inactive, Graham took over as the official home, but he is now himself going into inactivity) Should we try asking Savannah, either non-GNU or GNU? How much work would it be to meet Savannah's licensing/guideline restrictions regarding binary blobs and stuff? How many of those are LilyPond-specific? If there are technically unavoidable obstacles, the special strategical significance of GUB might still make it possible to negotiate about the hosting with Richard Stallman, currently the ultimate decision maker. I think that cross-platform support is currently troublesome for enough projects that the compile under GNU/Linux, provide everywhere approach of GUB would mean a significant concentration of efforts for other GNU projects as well. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 6:24 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org writes: (BTW moving GUB to a user-agnostic home such as https://github.com/lilypond would make sense to avoid such confusion. After Jan went mostly inactive, Graham took over as the official home, but he is now himself going into inactivity) Should we try asking Savannah, either non-GNU or GNU? How much work would it be to meet Savannah's licensing/guideline restrictions regarding binary blobs and stuff? How many of those are LilyPond-specific? If there are technically unavoidable obstacles, the special strategical significance of GUB might still make it possible to negotiate about the hosting with Richard Stallman, currently the ultimate decision maker. I think that cross-platform support is currently troublesome for enough projects that the compile under GNU/Linux, provide everywhere approach of GUB would mean a significant concentration of efforts for other GNU projects as well. If you are keen on it, why not? Not sure if it's worth the trouble, though: Maybe more visibility would bring GUB more workers, and in that vein endorsement by a big player would be a boost. Unfortunately, I'm not sure GUB has a strong significance anymore. With no maintainer, no support team, virtually no devs, it's not attractive for new projects, which then opt for other cross-build solutions instead. The current hosting situation isn't bad that we need to take such important actions with savannah. With github, we already have hosting, a platform for contribution and review comments, and relatively strong visibility, at no effort from us. It seems there is confusion about who owns the official repo, which is easily solved if we move the repo from an individual to an organization. And since it's literally a click or two to do that, I though I would suggest it in passing. Anyway, we're sidestepping. Regards, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.cawrote: On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 04:41:46PM -0400, Julien Rioux wrote: I think the following would be a good 1-2 punch approach for the current development cycle: First, upgrade python in GUB and make sure we can build current dev and stable branches of lilypond from it. Then bump the python requirement in the dev branch and start migrating to a codebase that supports python 2.6+ and python 3+ Sounds great! Thanks for working on this. When would be a good timing to do the switch in GUB? Probably don't want to mess with releases from the current stable (2.18.x) branch at this point, so maybe wait until after the last 2.18.x is released, whenever that might be? Regards, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org writes: If you are keen on it, why not? Not sure if it's worth the trouble, though: Maybe more visibility would bring GUB more workers, and in that vein endorsement by a big player would be a boost. Unfortunately, I'm not sure GUB has a strong significance anymore. With no maintainer, no support team, virtually no devs, it's not attractive for new projects, which then opt for other cross-build solutions instead. There is not a lot around to opt for as far as I know. The current hosting situation isn't bad that we need to take such important actions with savannah. With github, we already have hosting, a platform for contribution and review comments, and relatively strong visibility, at no effort from us. Who is we? I for one am not going to agree to GitHub's quite invasive usage conditions for their free offerings which include killing a project for any reason they want to at any point of time, explicitly citing bandwidth usage as one such reason. Now the situation is in theory not all that different with Savannah. Except that Savannah does not serve stockholders but its users and Free Software. When they find that there is a technical problem in connection with serving a project, pull the plug will be way lower in the list of remedies than with GitHub. It seems there is confusion about who owns the official repo, which is easily solved if we move the repo from an individual to an organization. And since it's literally a click or two to do that, I though I would suggest it in passing. Anyway, we're sidestepping. Sure. I am not involved with GUB or the GitHub repos. So the question what to use for LilyPond is likely mostly up to Phil. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:39 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org writes: The current hosting situation isn't bad that we need to take such important actions with savannah. With github, we already have hosting, a platform for contribution and review comments, and relatively strong visibility, at no effort from us. Who is we? I for one am not going to agree to GitHub's quite invasive usage conditions for their free offerings which include killing a project for any reason they want to at any point of time, explicitly citing bandwidth usage as one such reason. You're right, for contributing a patch and/or commenting through github, it's we as in those that are bold enough to sign up on github. We also happily send patches or comments on the mailing list as usual; we as in those that are bold enough to post on public mailing lists. It's still an added value that a non-empty set of people are happy with. Now the situation is in theory not all that different with Savannah. Except that Savannah does not serve stockholders but its users and Free Software. When they find that there is a technical problem in connection with serving a project, pull the plug will be way lower in the list of remedies than with GitHub. Fortunately with git repos even if the hosting goes, the project's source code is still in hand, Regards, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org writes: On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:39 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org writes: The current hosting situation isn't bad that we need to take such important actions with savannah. With github, we already have hosting, a platform for contribution and review comments, and relatively strong visibility, at no effort from us. Who is we? I for one am not going to agree to GitHub's quite invasive usage conditions for their free offerings which include killing a project for any reason they want to at any point of time, explicitly citing bandwidth usage as one such reason. You're right, for contributing a patch and/or commenting through github, it's we as in those that are bold enough to sign up on github. We also happily send patches or comments on the mailing list as usual; we as in those that are bold enough to post on public mailing lists. It's still an added value that a non-empty set of people are happy with. Now the situation is in theory not all that different with Savannah. Except that Savannah does not serve stockholders but its users and Free Software. When they find that there is a technical problem in connection with serving a project, pull the plug will be way lower in the list of remedies than with GitHub. Fortunately with git repos even if the hosting goes, the project's source code is still in hand, That's not quite the same as we already have hosting, a platform for contribution and review comments. Everything beyond the content in private repositories is gone if a project is removed. And we have is a bit of a euphemism for proprietary software run on a proprietary service with a proprietary data store for everything but the central repository itself. It's more like we are permitted to use. Of course, with Savannah we have the same situation regarding the we are permitted to use angle, but the motivations for the permission are different. That makes me feel more at home. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:44 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: That's not quite the same as we already have hosting, a platform for contribution and review comments. Everything beyond the content in private repositories is gone if a project is removed. And we have is a bit of a euphemism for proprietary software run on a proprietary service with a proprietary data store for everything but the central repository itself. It's more like we are permitted to use. Of course, with Savannah we have the same situation regarding the we are permitted to use angle, but the motivations for the permission are different. That makes me feel more at home. Again, if you're keen on providing hosting elsewhere, why not go for it. My point of view says it is not worth it, yours differ. I'll be glad if we get back on thread. Regards, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org writes: On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:44 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: That's not quite the same as we already have hosting, a platform for contribution and review comments. Everything beyond the content in private repositories is gone if a project is removed. And we have is a bit of a euphemism for proprietary software run on a proprietary service with a proprietary data store for everything but the central repository itself. It's more like we are permitted to use. Of course, with Savannah we have the same situation regarding the we are permitted to use angle, but the motivations for the permission are different. That makes me feel more at home. Again, if you're keen on providing hosting elsewhere, why not go for it. My point of view says it is not worth it, yours differ. I'm not likely to invest myself much with GUB myself. The main incentive would be to do this as part of trying to align oneself closer with the GNU project in the hope/expectations that others use and contribute to GUB as a consequence. How much the LilyPond project would be profiting as a result if at all is not something I can really estimate. It is clear that at the current point of time, not much is happening with GUB, but it's not all that clear that other people's work on GUB would in turn help LilyPond's use case. I'll be glad if we get back on thread. Well, you were talking about a github-internal move. First step would likely be to communicate with Phil and figure out what GUB repository he is actually working with. His internet provider apparently is currently Ddos-attacked, so we probably need to wait until this calms down. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
I have forked gub and have been working on it for a while now. https://github.com/jjbenham/gub It is very different now from https://github.com/gperciva/gub and the main master. I don't know how to contribute changes unless via per file basis. Then each patch would need to be tested. I have added support for gtk3 on mingw, darwin-x86 and linux-x86. I also upgraded many things like tar (this adds .xz support). This was all to support the denemo project. It would be nice to work with others on it. Jeremiah On Mar 18, 2014 4:58 AM, Julien Rioux jri...@lyx.org wrote: On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: I was of the opinion that GUB already uses Python 2.6? GUB master at https://github.com/gperciva/gub (the current official home) definitely does not use python 2.6. It ships python 2.4.5 If you are using GUB master at https://github.com/janneke/gub then it does use python 2.6, but it lacks the fix for python's hashlib module, which then fails to import at run time. I added that fix and a couple others in the previously mentioned pull request. (BTW moving GUB to a user-agnostic home such as https://github.com/lilypond would make sense to avoid such confusion. After Jan went mostly inactive, Graham took over as the official home, but he is now himself going into inactivity) Regards, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Jeremiah Benham jjben...@chicagoguitar.com wrote: I have forked gub and have been working on it for a while now. https://github.com/jjbenham/gub It is very different now from https://github.com/gperciva/gub and the main master. I don't know how to contribute changes unless via per file basis. Then each patch would need to be tested. I have added support for gtk3 on mingw, darwin-x86 and linux-x86. I also upgraded many things like tar (this adds .xz support). This was all to support the denemo project. It would be nice to work with others on it. Jeremiah Hi Jeremiah, Thanks for reaching out. A while ago I noticed your fork and though that at some point it would be good to investigate what should be contributed back. Unfortunately it takes a lot of time to test changes in GUB, and I was already puzzled enough by the various different branches between Jan's and Graham's repos. I'm glad to hear that you would like to contribute your changes back, that will be a welcome collaboration. Cheers, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Python 3 support
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 04:41:46PM -0400, Julien Rioux wrote: I think the following would be a good 1-2 punch approach for the current development cycle: First, upgrade python in GUB and make sure we can build current dev and stable branches of lilypond from it. Then bump the python requirement in the dev branch and start migrating to a codebase that supports python 2.6+ and python 3+ Sounds great! Thanks for working on this. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Python 3 support
Hi, Our python scripts currently require a python2 interpreter with version at least 2.4, but by bumping the requirement to 2.6 we could start introducing from __future__ import print_function which will be one of the major step towards supporting both python2 and python3 interpreters with a single codebase. One of the big hurdle to bumping the python version requirement is our own cross-platform build system GUB which provides 2.4, but last summer I was able to build lilypond with an updated GUB, based on some experimental branch by Jan where I added a few commits. You can find the patchset here: https://github.com/gperciva/gub/pull/6 I think the following would be a good 1-2 punch approach for the current development cycle: First, upgrade python in GUB and make sure we can build current dev and stable branches of lilypond from it. Then bump the python requirement in the dev branch and start migrating to a codebase that supports python 2.6+ and python 3+ Thoughts? Objections? Regards, Julien ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
