Hi Alex, Yes that is a good effort, me and Lewis have worked on podaacpy in the past week, we made it compatible to both python2.x and python3.x. This is was done keeping the Earth Science community in mind. So there would be no troubles from podaac integration and I would be glad to join you guys on making OCW both python2.x and python3.x compatible.
Thanks, Omkar. On 30 September 2016 at 07:14, Goodman, Alexander (398K) < alexander.good...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: > Hi Lewis, > > Glad we are on the same page, and that sounds like a fantastic idea. I can > get around to committing that change to master tomorrow. > > Thanks, > Alex > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 6:21 PM, lewis john mcgibbney <lewi...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Hi Alex, > > I couldn't agree more. > > One way we could immediately find out is to also build against Python > > version 2.7, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 within travis.yml > > https://github.com/apache/climate/blob/master/.travis.yml#L18-L19 > > Do you want to go ahead and commit the change to master... let travis CI > > run the code and see where we are at? > > I am happy to work with the team to gradually upgrade the entire codebase > > based on the errors flagged by TravisCI. > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:57 PM, <dev-digest-h...@climate.apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Python 2/3 compatibility > > > From: "Goodman, Alexander (398K)" <alexander.good...@jpl.nasa.gov> > > > To: "dev@climate.apache.org" <dev@climate.apache.org> > > > Cc: > > > Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:57:44 -0700 > > > Subject: Python 2/3 compatibility > > > Hi all, > > > > > > For those out of the loop, Lewis has been spearheading the effort to > move > > > the OCW codebase to Python 3 ( > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLIMATE-854). We are also in the > > > process of moving over our conda packages to the conda forge ( > > > http://conda-forge.github.io/) in order to help automate building them > > > across multiple python versions. > > > > > > Personally while I support making OCW Python 3 compatible, I also want > to > > > reiterate that I think we should also strive to make our code backwards > > > compatible with Python 2. That means, for example, we should be using > > > things like imports from future at the top of our module files as > needed. > > > > > > As I have said, I think many users in the Earth Science community will > be > > > sticking to Python 2 for as long as they can, and that is the > impression > > I > > > have gotten after talking with many other people. What do you guys > think? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Alex > > > -- > > > Alex Goodman > > > Data Scientist I > > > Science Data Modeling and Computing (398K) > > > Jet Propulsion Laboratory > > > California Institute of Technology > > > Tel: +1-818-354-6012 > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://home.apache.org/~lewismc/ > > @hectorMcSpector > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/lmcgibbney > > > > > > -- > Alex Goodman > Data Scientist I > Science Data Modeling and Computing (398K) > Jet Propulsion Laboratory > California Institute of Technology > Tel: +1-818-354-6012 >
