On 10/2/2018 11:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 10/2/2018 12:41 PM, Simon Cross wrote: >> Are there any core devs that Michael or Erik could collaborate with? >> Rather than rely on adhoc patch review from random core developers. > > You two might collaborate with each other to the extent of reviewing > some of each other's PRs. Might be difficult. We both, or at least I, claim ignorance of the others platform. I still have a lot of PEP to learn, and my idea of a bug-fix (for Python2) was seen by core-dev as a feature change. I would not feel comfortable trying to mentor someone in things PEP, etc.. > That still leaves the issue of merging. How much confidence is there in all the "CI" tests? Does that not offer sufficient confidence for a core-dev to press merge. How about "master" continuing to be what it is, but insert a new "pre-master" branch that the buildbots actually test on (e.g., what is now the 3.X) and have a 3.8 buildbot - for what is now the "master".
PR would still be done based on master, but an "initial" merge would be via the pre-master aka 3.X buildbot tests. How "friendly" git is - that it not become such a workload to keep it clean - I cannot say. Still learning to use git. Better, but still do not want to assume it would be easy. My hope is that it would make it easier to consider a "merge" step that gets all the buildbots involved for even broader CI tests. > >> Michael and Eric: Question -- are you interested in becoming core >> developers at least for the purposes of maintaining these platforms in >> future? > > Since adhoc is not working to get merges, I had this same suggestion. > Michael and Erik, I presume you have gotten some guidelines on what > modifications to C code might be accepted, and what concerns people have. imho: guidelines - paraphrased - as little as possible :) I have many assumptions, and one of those is that my assumptions are probably incorrect. Goal: have AIX recognized as a Stable platform, even if not in the highest supported category. And that implies, support as far as I am able, to keep it "Stable". > > I think for tests, a separate test_aix.py might be a good idea for > aix-only tests Unclear to me how this would work. Too young in Python I guess (or just a very old dog), but what test would be needed for AIX, or any other platform, that would not need to be tested in some fashion for the 'other' platforms. At a hunch, where there are many platform.system() dependencies expected (e.g., test_posix, maybe doing something in the class definition (is there a "Root" Object/Class that all inherit from. Maybe a (read-only) "root" attribute (or is property better?) could be the value of platform.system(), and iirc, might be used by as @property in unittest. (so, if not in "root" class, then in something like unittest/__init__.py. I hope to be "close" in "Python thinking" - enough that someone who actually knows how the pieces fit together could come with a better, and more appropriate guideline/implementation. > , while modification of other tests might be limited to adding skips. > The idea would be to make it easy to remove aix stuff in the future if > it again became unsupported. IMHO: IBM and AIX do not mention it, but for openstack cloudmanagement (very specifically cloud-init) AIX needs a recognized stable Python implementation. I am "surprised" in the level of communication of IBM with Python community. Personally, I do not see AIX as a specialized platform. Feels more like the "last-standing" fully supported (commercial OEM) 'POSIX-UNIX'. Of course my focus is narrow - so maybe there is a lot of support for commercial platforms such as HPUX, Solaris, and other mainstream UNIXes. Feel free to correct me!! > Ditto for other specialized platforms. > > > > _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
