Thanks for the info; it sounds reasonable to me! (A big +1 to getting rid of ant, of course).
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 12:56 PM Michael A. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > i would like to update and maintain the py colleges and deprecate and > eventually remove the py3 one. > > 1. Despite being less modern, the py codebase has been kept somewhat more > pythonic. Capitalizing `schema.Parse` and the literal translation of the > java parsing normal form implementation are two oddities we could address. > There are several issues and pull requests inquiring why the two python > implementations aren't API compatible. > 2. Several modules in py3 were never completed. I called out txipc as > broken, but the tether stuff is missing entirely. > > Things we need to do to make this possible: > > 1. Make the py codebase compatible with py3.5. I've been working on this, > while still trying to maintain 2.7 compatibility for now. > 2. I want to port py3's setup approach, making it possible to package and > test py without ant. There are lots of benefits, but the only thing on > topic here is to be able to be able to use multiple python versions at the > same time. (We should look at tox soon.) > > What do you think? > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 04:23 Ryan Skraba <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Tick-tock... just bumping this up as the year end approaches! Any > > interest in making a statement or plan for python2 support for future > > releases of Avro? > > > > There should be one more maintenance release of python 2.7 in 2020 > > (after sunset) for the accumulated fixes. > > > > I'm in the context of looking at the docker+build scripts: keeping or > > dropping the python2 runtime has little significant impact. > > > > Ryan > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 1:22 PM Michael A. Smith <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Inline… > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 05:03 Ismaël Mejía <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Probably is a good idea that we publish our policy around python > > > > support [1] as other projects have done [2]. > > > > I think supporting python 2 makes sense at least for our latest > > > > release of this year so probably 1.9.x or eventually 1.10.x. > > > > > > > > > i agree wholeheartedly, but only python 2.7. > > > > > > I am not at all familiar with our python3 codebase, are we feature > > > > equivalent? otherwise maybe worth to create JIRAs and work on those. > > > > > > > > > Not perfectly, and there is work on that, but the biggest gap is that > > > lang/py is much more extensively tested, but its tests use pyant, which I > > > have not yet figured out how to port. > > > > > > [1] https://pythonclock.org/ > > > > [2] https://python3statement.org/ > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:38 AM Driesprong, Fokko <[email protected] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure how much effort we should put into Python2.7 in general, > > > > since > > > > > this version is EOL after this year. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, Fokko > > > > > > > > > > Op ma 24 jun. 2019 om 03:20 schreef Michael A. Smith < > > > > [email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > > > There's some not-insignificant complexity in the lang/py codebase > > to > > > > > > support derelict versions of Python. There are polyfills for json, > > > > structs, > > > > > > a whole "StoppableHTTPServer" in avro.tool. > > > > > > > > > > > > I created AVRO-2445 and will start removing this stuff now, but > > wanted > > > > to > > > > > > bounce the idea around the list in case there's some obscure > > reason to > > > > keep > > > > > > these things around. > > > > > > > > > > > >
