dblaikie added a comment. In D112212#3081828 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112212#3081828>, @JDevlieghere wrote:
> In D112212#3080491 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112212#3080491>, @teemperor > wrote: > >> This LGTM, but `shlex.join` is actually Py3 exclusive and I don't think >> there is a good Py2 replacement. I think we're just in time for the Py2->3 >> migration according to the timeline Jonas posted last year >> <https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/2020-August/016388.html>, so >> let's use this patch to actually do that? Then we can also get rid of all >> the `six` stuff etc. >> >> Let's see if Jonas has any objections against dropping Py2 with this, >> otherwise this is good to go. > > We're planning to branch from open source on October 26th. If there's no > urgency, it would really be great if we can hold off breaking Py2 until then. > > I'm all in favor for getting rid of Python 2 support, but sweeping changes > like dropping the `six` stuff will introduce a lot of headaches (merge > conflicts) for us. If we could postpone that for another release that would > save us a bunch of engineering time. No judgment (I think it's a reasonable request to punt a patch like this a few days if it helps out major contributors) - but I'm curious/just not quite wrapping my head around: Why would it be easier if this sort of patch went in after you branch? I'd have thought it'd be easier if it goes in before the branch. That way when you're backporting patches from upstream after the branch there will be fewer unrelated changes/merge conflicts, yeah? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D112212/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D112212 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
