On 12 December 2011 07:28, Chris McDonough <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 23:36 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > > > It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors > > > have no current intention to port this code to Python 3". > > > > That classifier already exists: "Programming Language :: Python :: 2" > > indicates support for Python 2, and absence of "Programming Language :: > > Python :: 3" then indicates that this version lacks Python 3 support. > > I don't think classifiers should be used to indicate some intention of > > package authors, in particular since the intention may change, but > > past releases will not. > > Thanks to Richard for adding the classifier. > > Point taken about past releases; lots of packages on PyPI have already > seen their last release. > > But if the current party line in python-dev that goes something like "if > you don't want to port to Python 3, you don't have to" is to be > credible, then ongoing maintainers who choose not to port to Python 3 > should not be subject to pressure exhibited by sites like the "wall of > shame". Being able to express the no-port intent explicitly relieves > the stupidest of those pressures. > > I'm sympathetic to the opinion "the wall of shame should not make a > difference". But we have a PR problem, because the wall of shame is > linked endlessly from comments about Python 3 stores in every news > aggregator (Reddit, Hacker News, etc). People tend to use it as a stick > to beat the helpless with. > >
Well sure - but python-dev has absolutely nothing to do with the wall-of-shame. In addition whoever is responsible for it, is very unresponsive and apparently not interested in fixing factual errors in the list. So I doubt the new classifier will have any effect on that website I'm afraid. :-( Michael Foord > > If you think that this is still different from what you are asking: > > What specific packages would be tagged with that classifier (I need > > two at least), and did that package authors agree to add the classifier > > to their package if it was available? Which specific classifier do you > > propose to add? > > The ones that I have some direct responsibility for are: > > - Supervisor > - meld3 > > The ones that I am one step removed from and can venture a very educated > guess about because I participate on the related maillists and > occasionally contribute are: > > - Routes > - Pylons > - zdaemon > - ZConfig > - most zope.* packages that aren't already py3 compat > - The Zope2 package > - The Plone package > - The Acquisition package (Zope-related) > - most zc.* packages > - all five.* packages (Zope-related) > - all plone.* packages > - borg.localrole (Plone) > - all archetypes.* packages (Plone) > - all kss.* packages (Plone) > - all Products.* packages (Zope2 products) > - RestrictedPython > > All of these packages have > 90K downloads and are featured prominently > on the wall of shame (they actually form a large portion of the > "unported" stuff; 65 packages or so out of about 120). To the extent > that the above packages will see any new release, I suspect their > maintainers would be happy to mark them "Python 2 only". > > - C > > > _______________________________________________ > Catalog-SIG mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig > -- http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ May you do good and not evil May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others May you share freely, never taking more than you give. -- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
_______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
