Re: Python detection

Am 13.04.2013 um 03:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org: José Matos wrote: So these are the facts. The question then is how do we want to proceed? I thought we want to be 3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit.

Re: Python detection

Op 13-04-13 03:09, Pavel Sanda schreef: José Matos wrote: So these are the facts. The question then is how do we want to proceed? I thought we want to be 3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. What's the status of

Re: Python detection

Stephan Witt wrote: What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? On my Mac (latest version Mac OS X 10.8.3) the default is 2.7.2. Default is not so important, important is 3.x availability, we have mostly working selection mechanism thanks to Enrico. Pavel

Re: Python detection

Pavel Sanda wrote: Stephan Witt wrote: What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? On my Mac (latest version Mac OS X 10.8.3) the default is 2.7.2. Default is not so important, important is 3.x availability, we have mostly working selection mechanism thanks to Enrico. 3.2.1 is

Re: Python detection

Georg Baum wrote: 3.2.1 is available in debian squeeze (the current stable version). Wrong, it is 3.1.3, but does not matter. Georg

Re: Python detection

On 2013-04-13, Georg Baum wrote: Pavel Sanda wrote: Stephan Witt wrote: What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? On my Mac (latest version Mac OS X 10.8.3) the default is 2.7.2. Default is not so important, important is 3.x availability, we have mostly working selection

Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Friday 12 April 2013 18:09:02 Pavel Sanda wrote: I thought we want to be 3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? Pavel In the mean time it is possible to use

Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: In the mean time it is possible to use the features of python 2.7 that allow an easy update to python 3.3. I hope we already at least support python 2.7, cause what I see in changelogs, Uwe already ships it in Win version :) Note that even if we go python 3 we should set a

Re: Python detection

On 04/13/2013 02:09 PM, José Matos wrote: On Friday 12 April 2013 18:09:02 Pavel Sanda wrote: I thought we want to be 3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? Pavel

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Saturday 13 April 2013 11:36:18 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: In the mean time it is possible to use the features of python 2.7 that allow an easy update to python 3.3. I hope we already at least support python 2.7, cause what I see in changelogs, Uwe already ships it in Win

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: Oh, BTW and then if we go with python 3.x we can call the next version lyx 3.0. :-D Or we can already adopt the firefox convention and go with lyx-3.0 for new release. :-) 195.113.26.193/~sanda/facepalm.jpg :D

Re: Re: Python detection

On Saturday 13 April 2013 16:53:42 Richard Heck wrote: Isn't there some import __future__ thing we can use to make this easy? Or is that what is only in 2.7? Richard python 2.7 supports both from future import as well as new features that were backported from python 3 (specifically

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Saturday 13 April 2013 16:37:55 Pavel Sanda wrote: facepalm.jpg By using a polar bear instead of a cat you have spoken to my heart. ;-) Cheers, -- José Abílio

Re: Python detection

Am 13.04.2013 um 03:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda : > José Matos wrote: >> So these are the facts. The question then is how do we want to proceed? > > I thought we want to be >3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). > Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without

Re: Python detection

Op 13-04-13 03:09, Pavel Sanda schreef: José Matos wrote: So these are the facts. The question then is how do we want to proceed? I thought we want to be >3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. What's the status of

Re: Python detection

Stephan Witt wrote: > > What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? > > On my Mac (latest version Mac OS X 10.8.3) the default is 2.7.2. Default is not so important, important is 3.x availability, we have mostly working selection mechanism thanks to Enrico. Pavel

Re: Python detection

Pavel Sanda wrote: > Stephan Witt wrote: >> > What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? >> >> On my Mac (latest version Mac OS X 10.8.3) the default is 2.7.2. > > Default is not so important, important is 3.x availability, we have > mostly working selection mechanism thanks to

Re: Python detection

Georg Baum wrote: > 3.2.1 is available in debian squeeze (the current stable version). Wrong, it is 3.1.3, but does not matter. Georg

Re: Python detection

On 2013-04-13, Georg Baum wrote: > Pavel Sanda wrote: >> Stephan Witt wrote: >>> > What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? >>> On my Mac (latest version Mac OS X 10.8.3) the default is 2.7.2. >> Default is not so important, important is 3.x availability, we have >> mostly working

Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Friday 12 April 2013 18:09:02 Pavel Sanda wrote: > I thought we want to be >3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). > Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. > > What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? > > Pavel In the mean time it is possible

Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: > In the mean time it is possible to use the features of python 2.7 that allow > an easy update to python 3.3. I hope we already at least support python 2.7, cause what I see in changelogs, Uwe already ships it in Win version :) > Note that even if we go python 3 we should

Re: Python detection

On 04/13/2013 02:09 PM, José Matos wrote: On Friday 12 April 2013 18:09:02 Pavel Sanda wrote: I thought we want to be >3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? Pavel

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Saturday 13 April 2013 11:36:18 Pavel Sanda wrote: > José Matos wrote: > > In the mean time it is possible to use the features of python 2.7 that > > allow an easy update to python 3.3. > > I hope we already at least support python 2.7, cause what I see in > changelogs, Uwe already ships it

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: > Oh, BTW and then if we go with python 3.x we can call the next version lyx > 3.0. :-D > Or we can already adopt the firefox convention and go with lyx-3.0 for new > release. :-) 195.113.26.193/~sanda/facepalm.jpg :D

Re: Re: Python detection

On Saturday 13 April 2013 16:53:42 Richard Heck wrote: > Isn't there some "import __future__" thing we can use to make this easy? > Or is that what is only in 2.7? > > Richard python 2.7 supports both "from future import " as well as new features that were backported from python 3

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Saturday 13 April 2013 16:37:55 Pavel Sanda wrote: > facepalm.jpg By using a polar bear instead of a cat you have spoken to my heart. ;-) Cheers, -- José Abílio

Re: Re: Python detection

On Thursday 11 April 2013 10:59:47 Pavel Sanda wrote: I think that long term solution was rather to switch to Python 3. But all such talk is cheap, we need patches Pavel The first step is to raise the supported python to version 2.7 and then the transition will be easy. That was the whole

Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: Are we there at that point? You are the pythonist here :) P

Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Friday 12 April 2013 12:35:57 Pavel Sanda wrote: You are the pythonist here P :-) The issue is what is the minimum version of python that we want to support. If we decide to stay with python 2 as the default version the question then becomes what is the minimum version we want to

Re: Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: So these are the facts. The question then is how do we want to proceed? I thought we want to be 3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? Pavel

Re: Re: Python detection

On Thursday 11 April 2013 10:59:47 Pavel Sanda wrote: > I think that long term solution was rather to switch to Python 3. > But all such talk is cheap, we need patches > Pavel The first step is to raise the supported python to version 2.7 and then the transition will be easy. That was the whole

Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: > Are we there at that point? You are the pythonist here :) P

Re: Re: Re: Python detection

On Friday 12 April 2013 12:35:57 Pavel Sanda wrote: > You are the pythonist here > P :-) The issue is what is the minimum version of python that we want to support. If we decide to stay with python 2 as the default version the question then becomes what is the minimum version we want to

Re: Re: Re: Python detection

José Matos wrote: > So these are the facts. The question then is how do we want to proceed? I thought we want to be >3.0 compatible and ditch 2.x series completely(?). Otherwise it looks like just maintenace burden without profit. What's the status of python 3 on fedora/debian/suse? Pavel

Re: Python detection

On 2013-04-11, Pavel Sanda wrote: Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:10:48AM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: As a long-term project, I suggest making the Python scripts run with both, Python 2.x and 3.x (with x some decent choice of not-too-old versions). For simple modules, this

Re: Python detection

Guenter Milde wrote: As a long-term project, I suggest making the Python scripts run with both, Python 2.x and 3.x (with x some decent choice of not-too-old versions). I think that long term solution was rather to switch to Python 3. But all such talk is cheap, we need patches :) Pavel

Re: Python detection

On 2013-04-11, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:10:48AM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: As a long-term project, I suggest making the Python scripts run with both, Python 2.x and 3.x (with x some decent choice of not-too-old versions). For simple modules, this

Re: Python detection

Guenter Milde wrote: > As a long-term project, I suggest making the Python scripts run with both, > Python 2.x and 3.x (with x some decent choice of not-too-old versions). I think that long term solution was rather to switch to Python 3. But all such talk is cheap, we need patches :) Pavel

Re: Python detection

Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:10:48AM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: Enrico Forestieri wrote: 2) Every time Systemcall::startscript() is called with a command starting exactly as python -tt, the python string is replaced with the name of the good python, e.g.,

Re: Python detection

Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:10:48AM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > 2) Every time Systemcall::startscript() is called with a command starting > > >exactly as "python -tt", the "python" string is replaced with the name > > >of the

Re: Python detection

On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 09:44:49PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: Enrico, what is the status of the python 2 detection you committed some time ago? Is it just supposed to be fallback in order to avoid worst things or is lyx supposed to work on systems with both 2.6 3.x pythons? It is supposed

Re: Python detection

Enrico Forestieri wrote: 2) Every time Systemcall::startscript() is called with a command starting exactly as python -tt, the python string is replaced with the name of the good python, e.g., python -tt - python2.6.8 -tt. Yep, but there are parts of code like preview machinery which run

Re: Python detection

On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:10:48AM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: Enrico Forestieri wrote: 2) Every time Systemcall::startscript() is called with a command starting exactly as python -tt, the python string is replaced with the name of the good python, e.g., python -tt - python2.6.8 -tt.

Re: Python detection

On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 09:44:49PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Enrico, > > what is the status of the python 2 detection you committed some time ago? > Is it just supposed to be fallback in order to avoid worst things or > is lyx supposed to work on systems with both 2.6 & 3.x pythons? It is

Re: Python detection

Enrico Forestieri wrote: > 2) Every time Systemcall::startscript() is called with a command starting >exactly as "python -tt", the "python" string is replaced with the name >of the "good" python, e.g., "python -tt" -> "python2.6.8 -tt". Yep, but there are parts of code like preview

Re: Python detection

On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 10:10:48AM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > 2) Every time Systemcall::startscript() is called with a command starting > >exactly as "python -tt", the "python" string is replaced with the name > >of the "good" python, e.g., "python -tt" ->