Hi Aaron, Great find! Looks like it's just what we need.
...Thanks, ...Ken On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Aaron <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Ken, > > On 18/12/17 13:03, Kenneth Loafman wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> No, I agree. I was trying to say that we should either >> 1) have 0.8 in py2 and py3 branches, e.g. 0.8-py2, 0.8-py3 >> 2) use 2to3 in single 0.8 branch to produce py3 at install time. >> I'm guessing here, but the most stable would be two branches. I don't >> have enough experience with 2to3 to know if it's a viable use case. I may >> be way off base. >> >> > My plan was to use the http://python-future.org/ approach. > > The futurize tool spits out code looks and feels like Python 3, but runs > on Python 2.7 with imports that make those Python 2 functions act like > their Python 3 equivalents. I think we will find it much easier to maintain > just the one branch. > > Then in 0.9 we can just drop the compatibility imports. > > Kind regards, > > Aaron >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
