Hi Vinay, Many thanks for your efforts so far, as you can imagine I have a few questions, both procedural and technical. I should note though that I haven't reviewed all your changes in detail yet, since they are.. massive :)
I'm a bit concerned that you didn't get in touch with us before you started with the work, since tracking the changes would have been easier. FWIW, Martin von Löwis, Alex and me would be those you can ask if you need any further help, usually also on IRC in #django-dev. On 25.11.2011, at 18:33, Vinay Sajip wrote: > I'm working on a port of Django to Python 3. I'm getting close, and in > terms of > test coverage pretty much almost there, but a few remaining test > failures are > eluding me, and I could probably use some help to speed things up. > > I started with the features/py3k branch on the BitBucket Django mirror > (the one > at https://bitbucket.org/django/django), but whereas that was > approaching from > a point of view of running 2to3 over the Django codebase, I've > followed my > preferred strategy of aiming for a single codebase for 2.x and 3.x. > (This > strategy worked well for the virtualenv and pip ports which I did a > while ago.) Have you worked on top of the current py3k branch in SVN (which should be mirrored in the Mercurial repo)? Also, did you get in touch with Martin von Löwis who has previously spearheaded the porting efforts for a while and has been granted commit privileges to the py3k branch? I'm asking simply because I'm wondering how we should get your changes reviewed and committed to the official repo, it's a bit like facing a done deal. > I've updated the django.utils.py3 module to add whatever I needed, > gratefully > borrowing ideas from Benjamin Peterson's six project as needed. Aha, meaning that you've copied over parts of the six module? Would you (also as a way for helping out Django users later to port their code) recommend putting six completely in Django? We've previously done that with other libraries, e.g. unittest2. > I run the standard test suite on the codebase using Python 2.7.2 and 3.2.2 > (I'm > not supporting 3.0 or 3.1 - 3.2 is stable, 'callable' came back and is > liberally > used in Django, and I'm not sure it's worth bothering with support for > 3.0/3.1. Yeah, we've talked about that and don't consider 3.0 or 3.1 to be sensible to support in the future (given obvious bugs and/or lack of support from Python core). > The branch is available at > > https://bitbucket.org/vinay.sajip/django (features/py3k branch) > > Latest test result summaries are as follows: > > 2.7.2: ran 4229 tests in 301.690s > OK (skipped=71, expected failures=3) > > 3.2.2: Ran 4174 tests in 303.619s > FAILED (failures=6, errors=2, skipped=78, expected failures=2, > unexpected successes=1) > > I think these results are encouraging, and I hope you agree! I added 7 > skips, mostly these are due to different representations on 2.x and 3.x e.g. > u'foo' vs. 'foo'. Indeed they are, so the next step is to review them bit by bit and align it with the work done before your work. Ideally committing it to SVN. Jannis -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
