Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Terry Reedy]

On 5/24/2016 10:49 AM, Paul Moore wrote:

On 24 May 2016 at 15:11, Koos Zevenhoven  wrote:

Please, no.  We learned that lesson in Python 2.2.1 with True/False.


What happened? True was included in 2.2.1 but not False?-). Anyway, I
guess you are probably right, and "3.6->" is the way to go. Besides,
Guido already wrote that in the first response.


He did so because our policy rightly forbids changing os.


The history is at
http://python-history.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/the-history-of-bool-true-and-false.html
but basically we added new *constants* for True/False in a point
release. Some people used them, and their code only worked on 2.2.1
and above but not 2.2.0. Others were using variables called True and
False, and the 2.2.1 change broke their code (you could no longer
assign to those names).

So essentially it ended up that people couldn't say "works on 2.2" and
had to distinguish between 2.2.0 and 2.2.1+.

Python's strict backward compatibility rules basically stem from the
grief caused by that change.


The policy was reinforced by its violation in changing the behavior of a 
StringIO method in 3.1.2 or something like that.  For people affected 
(like me), the change resulted in a subtle bug that only manifested later.


--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Paul Moore]

On 24 May 2016 at 15:11, Koos Zevenhoven  wrote:
>> Please, no.  We learned that lesson in Python 2.2.1 with True/False.
>
> What happened? True was included in 2.2.1 but not False?-). Anyway, I
> guess you are probably right, and "3.6->" is the way to go. Besides,
> Guido already wrote that in the first response.

The history is at
http://python-history.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/the-history-of-bool-true-and-false.html
but basically we added new *constants* for True/False in a point
release. Some people used them, and their code only worked on 2.2.1
and above but not 2.2.0. Others were using variables called True and
False, and the 2.2.1 change broke their code (you could no longer
assign to those names).

So essentially it ended up that people couldn't say "works on 2.2" and
had to distinguish between 2.2.0 and 2.2.1+.

Python's strict backward compatibility rules basically stem from the
grief caused by that change.

Paul
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Koos Zevenhoven]

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Barry Warsaw  wrote:
> On May 24, 2016, at 02:03 PM, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
>
>>I guess we might consider adding __fspath__ in maintenance releases,
>>and make open() support it? That would cover a significant share of
>>use cases, although it might be weird if code written for 3.5.2
>>doesn't run on 3.5.1...
>
> Please, no.  We learned that lesson in Python 2.2.1 with True/False.

What happened? True was included in 2.2.1 but not False?-). Anyway, I
guess you are probably right, and "3.6->" is the way to go. Besides,
Guido already wrote that in the first response.

-- Koos

> Cheers,
> -Barry
> ___
> 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/k7hoven%40gmail.com
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Barry Warsaw]

On May 24, 2016, at 02:03 PM, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:

>I guess we might consider adding __fspath__ in maintenance releases,
>and make open() support it? That would cover a significant share of
>use cases, although it might be weird if code written for 3.5.2
>doesn't run on 3.5.1...

Please, no.  We learned that lesson in Python 2.2.1 with True/False.

Cheers,
-Barry
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Koos Zevenhoven]

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Chris Barker  wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:
>>
>> 3.5 is still getting bugfixes:
>> https://docs.python.org/devguide/#status-of-python-branches
>>
>> As for backporting __fspath__() for pathlib, you can easily write your own
>> subclass that adds it. And since the stdlib won't be updated in 3.5 for
>> consumption of fspath
>
>
> OK -- when I said "it", I meant the whole shebang -- i.e. the stdlib stuff
> too. But fair enough, we can't be backporting everything, and I that would
> be touching a lot of the lib.
>
> -CHB

I guess we might consider adding __fspath__ in maintenance releases,
and make open() support it? That would cover a significant share of
use cases, although it might be weird if code written for 3.5.2
doesn't run on 3.5.1... So maybe just 3.6-> ?

I'm not quite as busy as last week, so I might consider working on the
stdlib changes if I find the time. Or is someone already working on
this?

-- Koos
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Chris Barker]

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:

> 3.5 is still getting bugfixes:
> https://docs.python.org/devguide/#status-of-python-branches
>
> As for backporting __fspath__() for pathlib, you can easily write your own
> subclass that adds it. And since the stdlib won't be updated in 3.5 for
> consumption of fspath
>

OK -- when I said "it", I meant the whole shebang -- i.e. the stdlib stuff
too. But fair enough, we can't be backporting everything, and I that would
be touching a lot of the lib.

-CHB



> you're only missing out on production which your subclass can take care of.
>
> -brett
>
>
>
>> -CHB
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'll update the implementation task list shortly.
>>>
>>> -Brett
>>>
>>>

 On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:
 > Three questions:
 >
 > Should pathlib gain __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4?
 > Should pathlib's constructor support __fspath__() all the way back to
 3.4?
 > (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we
 backport
 > I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike being
 > available only in 3.6 :/)
 > Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the
 provisional
 > status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check)
 >
 > And a quick thanks to Guido for removing `path` from pathlib for me
 already.
 > :)
 >
 > ___
 > 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/guido%40python.org
 >



 --
 --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)

>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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/chris.barker%40noaa.gov
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
>> Oceanographer
>>
>> Emergency Response Division
>> NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
>> 7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
>> Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception
>>
>> chris.bar...@noaa.gov
>>
>


-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Brett Cannon]

On Mon, May 23, 2016, 09:55 Chris Barker  wrote:

> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:
>
>>
>> WFM. I'll let 3.4 and 3.5 just stay as they are and make all PEP 519
>> changes a 3.6 thing.
>>
>
> I'd like to see it in 3.5 if we could do that -- that'll be available for
> operational code a lot sooner than 3.6, and it's still in active
> maintenance mode, yes?
>

3.5 is still getting bugfixes:
https://docs.python.org/devguide/#status-of-python-branches

As for backporting __fspath__() for pathlib, you can easily write your own
subclass that adds it. And since the stdlib won't be updated in 3.5 for
consumption of fspath you're only missing out on production which your
subclass can take care of.

-brett



> -CHB
>
>
>
>
>> I'll update the implementation task list shortly.
>>
>> -Brett
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:
>>> > Three questions:
>>> >
>>> > Should pathlib gain __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4?
>>> > Should pathlib's constructor support __fspath__() all the way back to
>>> 3.4?
>>> > (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we
>>> backport
>>> > I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike being
>>> > available only in 3.6 :/)
>>> > Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the
>>> provisional
>>> > status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check)
>>> >
>>> > And a quick thanks to Guido for removing `path` from pathlib for me
>>> already.
>>> > :)
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > 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/guido%40python.org
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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/chris.barker%40noaa.gov
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
> Oceanographer
>
> Emergency Response Division
> NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
> 7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
> Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception
>
> chris.bar...@noaa.gov
>
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Chris Barker]

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:

>
> WFM. I'll let 3.4 and 3.5 just stay as they are and make all PEP 519
> changes a 3.6 thing.
>

I'd like to see it in 3.5 if we could do that -- that'll be available for
operational code a lot sooner than 3.6, and it's still in active
maintenance mode, yes?

-CHB




> I'll update the implementation task list shortly.
>
> -Brett
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:
>> > Three questions:
>> >
>> > Should pathlib gain __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4?
>> > Should pathlib's constructor support __fspath__() all the way back to
>> 3.4?
>> > (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we
>> backport
>> > I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike being
>> > available only in 3.6 :/)
>> > Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the
>> provisional
>> > status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check)
>> >
>> > And a quick thanks to Guido for removing `path` from pathlib for me
>> already.
>> > :)
>> >
>> > ___
>> > 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/guido%40python.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
>>
>
> ___
> 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/chris.barker%40noaa.gov
>
>


-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Georg Brandl]

On 05/20/2016 09:15 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2016-05-20 18:56 GMT+02:00 Guido van Rossum :
>> Let's start in 3.6 with all this. I added path to 3.4 because I didn't
>> realize it was in security-mode only.
> 
> I also had to ask the question to myself about branches, that's why I
> wrote this table ;-)
> https://docs.python.org/devguide/#status-of-python-branches
> 
> By the way, is it still up to date? Python 3.2 end-of-line is
> documented as 2016-02-20, so its status should be end-of-life, no?
> 
> Georg Brandl scheduled a 3.2.7 release at the end of February 2016,
> but I don't see it on python.org and I don't recall its announcement.
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-February/143300.html
> 
> Georg: any update on the Python 3.2 last release?

Still waiting for some last security update. I sent another mail to
python-dev that announced the delay, I think.

Georg



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Victor Stinner]

2016-05-20 18:56 GMT+02:00 Guido van Rossum :
> Let's start in 3.6 with all this. I added path to 3.4 because I didn't
> realize it was in security-mode only.

I also had to ask the question to myself about branches, that's why I
wrote this table ;-)
https://docs.python.org/devguide/#status-of-python-branches

By the way, is it still up to date? Python 3.2 end-of-line is
documented as 2016-02-20, so its status should be end-of-life, no?

Georg Brandl scheduled a 3.2.7 release at the end of February 2016,
but I don't see it on python.org and I don't recall its announcement.
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-February/143300.html

Georg: any update on the Python 3.2 last release?

Victor
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Brett Cannon]

On Fri, 20 May 2016 at 09:56 Guido van Rossum  wrote:

> Let's start in 3.6 with all this. I added path to 3.4 because I didn't
> realize it was in security-mode only. I've now undone all my work
> there. Let's not disturb it again, not even its docs.
>
> I don't think there's an "upstream" repo for pathlib (like there still
> is for asyncio) and I don't think there's much of a point in
> supporting __fspath__ in pathlib if there's no os.fspath(). It would
> only encourage hackery in apps that want to play with __fspath__.
>

WFM. I'll let 3.4 and 3.5 just stay as they are and make all PEP 519
changes a 3.6 thing.

I'll update the implementation task list shortly.

-Brett


>
> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:
> > Three questions:
> >
> > Should pathlib gain __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4?
> > Should pathlib's constructor support __fspath__() all the way back to
> 3.4?
> > (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we backport
> > I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike being
> > available only in 3.6 :/)
> > Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the
> provisional
> > status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check)
> >
> > And a quick thanks to Guido for removing `path` from pathlib for me
> already.
> > :)
> >
> > ___
> > 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/guido%40python.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
>
___
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

Re: [Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Guido van Rossum]

Let's start in 3.6 with all this. I added path to 3.4 because I didn't
realize it was in security-mode only. I've now undone all my work
there. Let's not disturb it again, not even its docs.

I don't think there's an "upstream" repo for pathlib (like there still
is for asyncio) and I don't think there's much of a point in
supporting __fspath__ in pathlib if there's no os.fspath(). It would
only encourage hackery in apps that want to play with __fspath__.

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Brett Cannon  wrote:
> Three questions:
>
> Should pathlib gain __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4?
> Should pathlib's constructor support __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4?
> (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we backport
> I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike being
> available only in 3.6 :/)
> Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the provisional
> status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check)
>
> And a quick thanks to Guido for removing `path` from pathlib for me already.
> :)
>
> ___
> 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/guido%40python.org
>



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
___
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

[Python-Dev] Removing the provisional label from pathlib

[Brett Cannon]

Three questions:

   1. Should pathlib gain __fspath__() all the way back to 3.4?
   2. Should pathlib's constructor support __fspath__() all the way back to
   3.4? (separate question as os.fspath() will only be in 3.6; and if we
   backport I'm not looking forward to making Typeshed happy w/o os.PathLike
   being available only in 3.6 :/)
   3. Should the docs from 3.4 and forward reflect the removal of the
   provisional status? (I assume yes, but wanted to double-check)

And a quick thanks to Guido for removing `path` from pathlib for me
already. :)
___
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