subject:"Python 3"

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-10 Thread Nick Timkovich

Regarding "forcing", the statement has a similar sentiment: "Third parties 
may offer paid support for our projects on old Python versions for longer 
than we support them ourselves. We won’t obstruct this, and it is a core 
principle of free and open source software that this is possible." If Blue 
Hat has a market for and chooses to develop Django 1.12 to run on their 
Python 2.8, that's fantastic. Just that you can't expect *free* support by 
the community beyond 2020.

Yes, the statement is status-quo for Django, but my motivation is more for 
this to expand the scope of said statement beyond the SciPy stack. Because 
this doesn't alter policy, I'm hoping for this as a smooth segue towards 
broader awareness/adoption.

On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 1:18:56 PM UTC-4, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>
> On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 3:22:47 PM UTC+2, Nick Sarbicki wrote:
>>
>> The problem with announcing way back is people outside of the sphere 
>> forget.
>>
>
> But then again those will not bother if Django is on Python3 or not. For 
> those it might be way more important if the default python is python3 on 
> their machines, or if a recent python is even available (looking at you 
> RHEL ;)).
>  
>
>> Even then (warning, dumb analogy coming), if I was asked to sign a 
>> petition to my government, I wouldn't refuse just because I'd already 
>> written to my MP about it. Speaking together has more power.
>>
>
> Yeah, given the current political situation I'd rather not continue that 
> argument -- lets leave politics out ;)
>  
>
>> My last job as an example had a huge pure python programme that is core 
>> to the business. My manager would try to justify upgrading to 3.x but it 
>> never caught on with the seniors. They would look at the stats and see most 
>> people still using 2.7, most libraries still working in 2.7, and see the 
>> current code still running in 2.7. There's never been anything big enough 
>> to convince them.
>>
>
> And those people are not convinced by a pledge either, so whats the point. 
> Then again, the decisions on companies often depend on other factors (ie 
> support on their machines etc…), and using python3 should be evaluated on a 
> project per project basis (and if a [non-binding]pledge is enough to shift 
> your managers, you probably have something else to worry about :D). 
>
> Even more to the point (and far worse in my mind) are the teaching 
>> websites like codecademy and learn python the hard way. They all still use 
>> python 2! And to justify it they quote employability and lack of 3.x 
>> uptake. Again if they were to have something bigger put in front of them to 
>> show how much of a dead end 2.7 is, it could push them to change.
>>
>
> Those people are quite aware that python3 is out there and ready, such a 
> statement is not going to help. It is probably quite a bit of work to 
> upgrade all those tutorials and they maybe do not see the gain in time vs 
> money or whatever…
>  
>
>> If that changes 3.x can get a big push forward. And that in the future 
>> can help Django.
>>
>
> And how exactly can that help Django?
>  
>
>> Realistically though, what is stopping us from signing? What negative 
>> outcome can it have?
>>
>
> Probably nothing, but Django in the past has never tried to convince 
> anyone or force anyone to do something (aside from the decisions we make 
> within our framework), and we do not feel the urge to force our view on 
> others -- nor sign a pledge for that matter. Our stance on Python 3 is 
> clear, we made our point, but we do not need or have to convince anyone 
> else.
>
> Cheers,
> Florian
>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/968d26e0-d792-4e0d-8bc7-b2173e850f30%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-10 Thread Nick Sarbicki

>
> Not going to carry this on much more as I doubt I'll be convincing. And
while I, for the most part, agree that group pledges won't change the minds
of those locked to 2.7, I'm hopelessly optimistic about it :-).

And how exactly can that help Django?
>

I think anything which advances and promotes python3 will have direct knock
on effects for Django post 2.0. We all want to see the project thrive, and
if the language it's built on thrives as well that can only be a good thing.


Realistically though, what is stopping us from signing? What negative
>> outcome can it have?
>>
>
> Probably nothing, but Django in the past has never tried to convince
> anyone or force anyone to do something (aside from the decisions we make
> within our framework), and we do not feel the urge to force our view on
> others -- nor sign a pledge for that matter. Our stance on Python 3 is
> clear, we made our point, but we do not need or have to convince anyone
> else.
>

Again I think there's a difference in opinion here. I don't see it as
something we as a project need to convince people of. I see it as a
statement of intent. Django doesn't need to convince anyone, it just needs
to say "this is happening" (and if I had my way in this conversation,
publicly, more than once and in union with other projects...). The
convincing should be left to those using it.

Maybe it would have been better to not have an officially signed list. But
instead just a curated list of projects which have announced that they
won't support 2.7 at some date. Would have been easier and less political.

Nick.

>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAGuvt920HewnMjjzvn8kYdA8uNL%2BpsgQLxoqy81P9%2B6ro_3O%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-10 Thread ludovic coues

The 1.11 release note already tell clearly it will be the last version
of django supporting python2.

2016-07-10 16:17 GMT+02:00 Sam Willis :
> As far as I can tell the only place where Django's Python 2.x deprecation is 
> stated is here https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2015/jun/25/roadmap/
>
> I think it should be more prominently stated in the docs, and as 1.11 is 
> supposedly the last to support 2.7 (according to the blog post) it may be 
> worth promoting it as such.
>
> Maybe there should be a pominant announcement about which version is the last 
> to support 2.7? Maybe in the release notes of 1.10?
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/678cee6c-3df4-4715-b6af-3d20bf3f3822%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



-- 

Cordialement, Coues Ludovic
+336 148 743 42

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAEuG%2BTZYGbQ-Hd91vS25QXMxJ0Xu-MxE%2BUfh1iDMBtf5oA0QMg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-10 Thread Florian Apolloner

On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 3:22:47 PM UTC+2, Nick Sarbicki wrote:
>
> The problem with announcing way back is people outside of the sphere 
> forget.
>

But then again those will not bother if Django is on Python3 or not. For 
those it might be way more important if the default python is python3 on 
their machines, or if a recent python is even available (looking at you 
RHEL ;)).

> Even then (warning, dumb analogy coming), if I was asked to sign a 
> petition to my government, I wouldn't refuse just because I'd already 
> written to my MP about it. Speaking together has more power.
>

Yeah, given the current political situation I'd rather not continue that 
argument -- lets leave politics out ;)

> My last job as an example had a huge pure python programme that is core to 
> the business. My manager would try to justify upgrading to 3.x but it never 
> caught on with the seniors. They would look at the stats and see most 
> people still using 2.7, most libraries still working in 2.7, and see the 
> current code still running in 2.7. There's never been anything big enough 
> to convince them.
>

And those people are not convinced by a pledge either, so whats the point. 
Then again, the decisions on companies often depend on other factors (ie 
support on their machines etc…), and using python3 should be evaluated on a 
project per project basis (and if a [non-binding]pledge is enough to shift 
your managers, you probably have something else to worry about :D). 

Even more to the point (and far worse in my mind) are the teaching websites 
> like codecademy and learn python the hard way. They all still use python 2! 
> And to justify it they quote employability and lack of 3.x uptake. Again if 
> they were to have something bigger put in front of them to show how much of 
> a dead end 2.7 is, it could push them to change.
>

Those people are quite aware that python3 is out there and ready, such a 
statement is not going to help. It is probably quite a bit of work to 
upgrade all those tutorials and they maybe do not see the gain in time vs 
money or whatever…

> If that changes 3.x can get a big push forward. And that in the future can 
> help Django.
>

And how exactly can that help Django?

> Realistically though, what is stopping us from signing? What negative 
> outcome can it have?
>

Probably nothing, but Django in the past has never tried to convince anyone 
or force anyone to do something (aside from the decisions we make within 
our framework), and we do not feel the urge to force our view on others -- 
nor sign a pledge for that matter. Our stance on Python 3 is clear, we made 
our point, but we do not need or have to convince anyone else.

Cheers,
Florian

>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0da82dc7-c515-4e10-b0b9-c3cd873956e6%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-10 Thread Sam Willis

As far as I can tell the only place where Django's Python 2.x deprecation is 
stated is here https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2015/jun/25/roadmap/

I think it should be more prominently stated in the docs, and as 1.11 is 
supposedly the last to support 2.7 (according to the blog post) it may be worth 
promoting it as such.

Maybe there should be a pominant announcement about which version is the last 
to support 2.7? Maybe in the release notes of 1.10?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/678cee6c-3df4-4715-b6af-3d20bf3f3822%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-10 Thread Nick Sarbicki

On my phone so excuse typos.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016, 13:28 Florian Apolloner,  wrote:

>
>
> On Saturday, July 9, 2016 at 10:26:25 PM UTC+2, Nick Sarbicki wrote:
>>
>> I don't think this is a question of what it would do for Django. More
>> what Django could do for python.
>
>
> We already announced (way way back), that we are dropping support for
> Python 2 and outlined our plan. That is imo enough, being on a side like
> python3statement.github.io does not add any value to python.
>

The problem with announcing way back is people outside of the sphere
forget. Yes everyone working with Django should know. I know everyone in my
team is very aware of the deadline.

But those outside of Django forget how seriously this is being taken by the
community.

Even then (warning, dumb analogy coming), if I was asked to sign a petition
to my government, I wouldn't refuse just because I'd already written to my
MP about it. Speaking together has more power.

Again, no immediate benefit to Django, but there is one for python.

> The web and scientific communities are essentially the two biggest python
>> communities around. If they both joined together to say "2020 is the
>> deadline for us and everyone else" it could really push a lot of others to
>> see how serious the need to move is now.
>>
>
> Everyone seriously involved in Django (agencies, companies) etc are
> already aware of our plans and are hopefully preparing themselves, if not,
> there is little else we can do which would change their minds…
>

Again, in Django most definitely are. But outside of Django it's less clear.

My last job as an example had a huge pure python programme that is core to
the business. My manager would try to justify upgrading to 3.x but it never
caught on with the seniors. They would look at the stats and see most
people still using 2.7, most libraries still working in 2.7, and see the
current code still running in 2.7. There's never been anything big enough
to convince them.

It didn't run Django so Django announcing wouldn't have any impact. But if
all the major libraries announced then it might have.

Even more to the point (and far worse in my mind) are the teaching websites
like codecademy and learn python the hard way. They all still use python 2!
And to justify it they quote employability and lack of 3.x uptake. Again if
they were to have something bigger put in front of them to show how much of
a dead end 2.7 is, it could push them to change.

If that changes 3.x can get a big push forward. And that in the future can
help Django.

Realistically though, what is stopping us from signing? What negative
outcome can it have?

Nick.

>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAGuvt90S1oGxePdm14J-xAzT_mPmQE3dk5_F3SZubv_hRssfHw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-10 Thread Florian Apolloner



On Saturday, July 9, 2016 at 10:26:25 PM UTC+2, Nick Sarbicki wrote:
>
> I don't think this is a question of what it would do for Django. More what 
> Django could do for python. 


We already announced (way way back), that we are dropping support for 
Python 2 and outlined our plan. That is imo enough, being on a side like 
python3statement.github.io does not add any value to python.

The web and scientific communities are essentially the two biggest python 
> communities around. If they both joined together to say "2020 is the 
> deadline for us and everyone else" it could really push a lot of others to 
> see how serious the need to move is now.
>

Everyone seriously involved in Django (agencies, companies) etc are already 
aware of our plans and are hopefully preparing themselves, if not, there is 
little else we can do which would change their minds…

Cheers,
Florian

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/1f594455-aee2-4be5-9524-d6f262c1960d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-09 Thread Nick Sarbicki

Hi Aymeric,

I don't think this is a question of what it would do for Django. More what
Django could do for python.

The web and scientific communities are essentially the two biggest python
communities around. If they both joined together to say "2020 is the
deadline for us and everyone else" it could really push a lot of others to
see how serious the need to move is now.

Python could gain from the greater uptake of 3.x and further downstream
Django will benefit too. I don't find it smug. I think it's a reality check.

Nick.

On Sat, 9 Jul 2016, 07:51 Aymeric Augustin, <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:

> Hello Nick,
>
> This website was quickly discussed by a few team members some time ago. It
> wasn’t clear to us what joining this initiative would achieve for Django.
>
> At first sight, it would mostly allow those who run on Python 3 to feel a
> bit more smug and make those who are stuck on Python 2 a bit more
> frustrated.
>
> The web community seems to be ahead of the scientific community for moving
> to Python 3. By now most Django users should be aware that they have to
> figure out a plan to migrate to Python 3 (or JS, or Go, etc.) I don’t think
> the scientific community is there yet.
>
> (To be honest, I discovered recently that some high-profile members of the
> Django community are still advocating to start new projects on Python 2.
> I’m failing to rationalize why they give this advice, certainly because of
> my biais.)
>
> If we consider that we’ve reached a point where we no longer need to focus
> on raising awareness, I’d rather drive the migration to Python 3 with a
> stick than with a carrot. There’s plenty of cool stuff to advertise :-)
>
> --
> Aymeric.
>
> On 09 Jul 2016, at 04:03, Nick Timkovich <prometheus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> With the release of IPython 5.0 LTS, it was mentioned as also being the
> final Py2-compat release in the series with a reference to the "Python 3
> Statement" https://python3statement.github.io/ Some of the prose in it
> refers to just the Scientific Stack (Numpy, Scipy, MPL, et al.), but an
> issue popped up saying that it could be generalized if other projects were
> to join/"sign", e.g. Django.
> https://github.com/python3statement/python3statement.github.io/issues/21
>
> I'm not strongly advocating one way or the other, just thought I'd bring
> it up.
>
> Nick
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0460ab73-1059-49e9-be63-2716378fddca%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0460ab73-1059-49e9-be63-2716378fddca%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/7E8B9E8B-D60E-48E4-BDB5-969BC4479EDF%40polytechnique.org
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/7E8B9E8B-D60E-48E4-BDB5-969BC4479EDF%40polytechnique.org?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAGuvt91Fw%2Bayc02jyW_-8hxj1_sekJvfkuUQsi0Ft566gyZ92w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-09 Thread Aymeric Augustin

Hello Nick,

This website was quickly discussed by a few team members some time ago. It 
wasn’t clear to us what joining this initiative would achieve for Django.

At first sight, it would mostly allow those who run on Python 3 to feel a bit 
more smug and make those who are stuck on Python 2 a bit more frustrated.

The web community seems to be ahead of the scientific community for moving to 
Python 3. By now most Django users should be aware that they have to figure out 
a plan to migrate to Python 3 (or JS, or Go, etc.) I don’t think the scientific 
community is there yet.

(To be honest, I discovered recently that some high-profile members of the 
Django community are still advocating to start new projects on Python 2. I’m 
failing to rationalize why they give this advice, certainly because of my 
biais.)

If we consider that we’ve reached a point where we no longer need to focus on 
raising awareness, I’d rather drive the migration to Python 3 with a stick than 
with a carrot. There’s plenty of cool stuff to advertise :-)

-- 
Aymeric.

> On 09 Jul 2016, at 04:03, Nick Timkovich <prometheus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> With the release of IPython 5.0 LTS, it was mentioned as also being the final 
> Py2-compat release in the series with a reference to the "Python 3 Statement" 
> https://python3statement.github.io/ Some of the prose in it refers to just 
> the Scientific Stack (Numpy, Scipy, MPL, et al.), but an issue popped up 
> saying that it could be generalized if other projects were to join/"sign", 
> e.g. Django. 
> https://github.com/python3statement/python3statement.github.io/issues/21
> 
> I'm not strongly advocating one way or the other, just thought I'd bring it 
> up.
> 
> Nick
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:django-developers@googlegroups.com>.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers 
> <https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0460ab73-1059-49e9-be63-2716378fddca%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0460ab73-1059-49e9-be63-2716378fddca%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/7E8B9E8B-D60E-48E4-BDB5-969BC4479EDF%40polytechnique.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Joining the "Python 3 Statement"

2016-07-08 Thread Nick Timkovich

With the release of IPython 5.0 LTS, it was mentioned as also being the 
final Py2-compat release in the series with a reference to the "Python 3 
Statement" https://python3statement.github.io/ Some of the prose in it 
refers to just the Scientific Stack (Numpy, Scipy, MPL, et al.), but an 
issue popped up saying that it could be generalized if other projects were 
to join/"sign", e.g. Django. 
https://github.com/python3statement/python3statement.github.io/issues/21

I'm not strongly advocating one way or the other, just thought I'd bring it 
up.

Nick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0460ab73-1059-49e9-be63-2716378fddca%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: django.utils.version.get_version() discrepancy for Python 2 vs. Python 3

2015-11-18 Thread Aymeric Augustin

Considering the information provided by Donald, it’s pretty clear to me that we 
should switch to rc as proposed by Tim.

-- 
Aymeric.



> On 18 nov. 2015, at 01:26, Tim Graham <timogra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Donald, updating setuptools was the factor I missed, not Python 2 vs. 
> 3.
> 
> On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 5:06:59 PM UTC-5, Donald Stufft wrote:
> 
>> On Nov 17, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Tim Graham <timog...@gmail.com > 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> There was a small hiccup with the 1.9 release candidate yesterday. Unless 
>> there is some other conflating factor that I missed, generating release 
>> packages using Python 2 will yield a name like "Django-1.9c1.tar.gz" while 
>> Python 3 yields "Django-1.9rc1.tar.gz" ('rc' instead of 'c'). Yesterday's 
>> release must have been the first release candidate to be generated using 
>> Python 3, and this broke the download page because 
>> django.utils.version.get_version() (which the website uses) returns "c1" for 
>> the file name instead of "rc1". I put in a (perhaps temporary) fix to 
>> correct this: https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/pull/547 
>> <https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/pull/547>
>> 
>> Do you think it's correct to make the change in Django itself? 
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676 
>> <https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676> -- I didn't track down the 
>> reason why this changed in Python.
>> While get_version() isn't a public API, it's widely used according to GitHub 
>> search.
>> 
> 
> Whoever generated the tarballs is probably using a version of setuptools 
> older than 8.0 in their Python 2 environment and a version of setuptools 
> newer than 8.0 in their Python 3 environment.
> 
> 
> -
> Donald Stufft
> PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:django-developers@googlegroups.com>.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers 
> <http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/e02a697f-36c4-4604-b484-1907919a6a54%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/e02a697f-36c4-4604-b484-1907919a6a54%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/72652A2A-292E-4303-ACCE-8BB1104196B0%40polytechnique.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: django.utils.version.get_version() discrepancy for Python 2 vs. Python 3

2015-11-17 Thread Tim Graham

Thanks Donald, updating setuptools was the factor I missed, not Python 2 
vs. 3.

On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 5:06:59 PM UTC-5, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Tim Graham <timog...@gmail.com > 
> wrote:
>
> There was a small hiccup with the 1.9 release candidate yesterday. Unless 
> there is some other conflating factor that I missed, generating release 
> packages using Python 2 will yield a name like "Django-1.9c1.tar.gz" while 
> Python 3 yields "Django-1.9rc1.tar.gz" ('rc' instead of 'c'). Yesterday's 
> release must have been the first release candidate to be generated using 
> Python 3, and this broke the download page because 
> django.utils.version.get_version() (which the website uses) returns "c1" 
> for the file name instead of "rc1". I put in a (perhaps temporary) fix to 
> correct this: https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/pull/547
>
> Do you think it's correct to make the change in Django itself? 
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676 -- I didn't track down the 
> reason why this changed in Python.
> While get_version() isn't a public API, it's widely used according to 
> GitHub search.
>
>
> Whoever generated the tarballs is probably using a version of setuptools 
> older than 8.0 in their Python 2 environment and a version of setuptools 
> newer than 8.0 in their Python 3 environment.
>
>
> -
> Donald Stufft
> PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 
> DCFA 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/e02a697f-36c4-4604-b484-1907919a6a54%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: django.utils.version.get_version() discrepancy for Python 2 vs. Python 3

2015-11-17 Thread Donald Stufft


> On Nov 17, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Tim Graham <timogra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There was a small hiccup with the 1.9 release candidate yesterday. Unless 
> there is some other conflating factor that I missed, generating release 
> packages using Python 2 will yield a name like "Django-1.9c1.tar.gz" while 
> Python 3 yields "Django-1.9rc1.tar.gz" ('rc' instead of 'c'). Yesterday's 
> release must have been the first release candidate to be generated using 
> Python 3, and this broke the download page because 
> django.utils.version.get_version() (which the website uses) returns "c1" for 
> the file name instead of "rc1". I put in a (perhaps temporary) fix to correct 
> this: https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/pull/547 
> <https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/pull/547>
> 
> Do you think it's correct to make the change in Django itself? 
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676 
> <https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676> -- I didn't track down the 
> reason why this changed in Python.
> While get_version() isn't a public API, it's widely used according to GitHub 
> search.
> 

Whoever generated the tarballs is probably using a version of setuptools older 
than 8.0 in their Python 2 environment and a version of setuptools newer than 
8.0 in their Python 3 environment.


-
Donald Stufft
PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/F8D9E8C5-852C-4BDF-A8E9-C3D91CFA7972%40stufft.io.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: django.utils.version.get_version() discrepancy for Python 2 vs. Python 3

2015-11-17 Thread Donald Stufft


> On Nov 17, 2015, at 3:03 PM, Aymeric Augustin 
>  wrote:
> 
> On 17 nov. 2015, at 18:00, Tim Graham  > wrote:
> 
>> Do you think it's correct to make the change in Django itself? 
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676 
>>  -- I didn't track down the 
>> reason why this changed in Python.
> 
> 
> 
> Per PEP 386, the standard scheme is ‘c’, although ‘rc’ is acceptable as well.

PEP 386 has been superseded by PEP 440 which recommends “rc” because almost 
everyone was using “rc” and not “c”. It didn’t seem reasonable to have a 
decision which was solely bike shedding (it can handle rc as easily as it can 
handle c) to favor an option that flew in the face of what most projects were 
doing.

-
Donald Stufft
PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/D79091CB-743C-4D96-8CAF-29718BDA61D9%40stufft.io.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: django.utils.version.get_version() discrepancy for Python 2 vs. Python 3

2015-11-17 Thread Aymeric Augustin

On 17 nov. 2015, at 18:00, Tim Graham <timogra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do you think it's correct to make the change in Django itself? 
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676 
> <https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676> -- I didn't track down the 
> reason why this changed in Python.



Per PEP 386, the standard scheme is ‘c’, although ‘rc’ is acceptable as well.

> Pre-releases can use a for "alpha", b for "beta" and c for "release 
> candidate". rc is an alternative notation for "release candidate" that is 
> added to make the version scheme compatible with Python's own version scheme. 
> rc sorts after c.

We can take this opportunity to change the naming scheme to what Python 3 
generates by default. We just have to be careful not to generate releases with 
Python 2 from now on. I suggest to add something in the release checklist 
(assuming you still follow it when making releases, perhaps you know it by 
heart by now).

-- 
Aymeric.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/34D2A435-48DA-47E2-A86F-FE5BF351%40polytechnique.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

django.utils.version.get_version() discrepancy for Python 2 vs. Python 3

2015-11-17 Thread Tim Graham

There was a small hiccup with the 1.9 release candidate yesterday. Unless
there is some other conflating factor that I missed, generating release
packages using Python 2 will yield a name like "Django-1.9c1.tar.gz" while
Python 3 yields "Django-1.9rc1.tar.gz" ('rc' instead of 'c'). Yesterday's
release must have been the first release candidate to be generated using
Python 3, and this broke the download page because
django.utils.version.get_version() (which the website uses) returns "c1"
for the file name instead of "rc1". I put in a (perhaps temporary) fix to
correct this: https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/pull/547

Do you think it's correct to make the change in Django itself?
https://github.com/django/django/pull/5676 -- I didn't track down the
reason why this changed in Python.
While get_version() isn't a public API, it's widely used according to
GitHub search.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/8a7f8f47-6a43-4a02-a0f5-f64461cefadf%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

1 2 3 4 >

1 - 100 of 301 matches

Mail list logo