[Python-Dev] 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Facundo Batista 
Hello!

Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?

Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)

(not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the
rationale behind it)

Thanks!

-- 
.Facundo

Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/
PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/
Twitter: @facundobatista
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M5N3PZP4IUMKRZJKKJQA4IXK5VDX5MOP/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] arm64 python 3.5.6 test case failure - ctypes/test/test_structures.py (test_pass_by_value)

2019-11-28 Thread Peter Morrow via Python-Dev 
Hi Folks,

Python-dev seemed to be the most appropriate email alias for this,
though please do point me somewhere else if this is not appropriate.

We are using a custom arm64 based distro built using yocto and as such
we are currently using python 3.5.6.  We are hitting a failure in a python3 
test case qemu running under QEMU that we would like to try to resolve if 
possible:

root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 --version
Python 3.5.6
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 ctypes/test/test_structures.py
.Fs.
==
FAIL: test_pass_by_value (__main__.StructureTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "ctypes/test/test_structures.py", line 419, in
test_pass_by_value
self.assertEqual(s.first, 0xdeadbeef)
AssertionError: 195948557 != 3735928559

--
Ran 28 tests in 0.457s

FAILED (failures=1, skipped=1)
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5#

>From searching the web I came across this bug which appears to match
what we are seeing:

https://bugs.python.org/issue29804 ("test_ctypes test_pass_by_value
fails on arm64 (aarch64) architecture").
However it looks like this fix is already in 3.5.6 so this isn't it.

Next set of searching led me here:

https://bugs.python.org/issue30353 and thus this patch:

https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/9ba3aa4d02a110d1a1ea464a8aff3be7dd9c63c3

So I applied this patch but we end up with this now:

root@10:~# cd /usr/lib/python3.5/
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 ctypes/test/test_structures.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "ctypes/test/test_structures.py", line 2, in 
from ctypes import *
  File "/usr/lib/python3.5/ctypes/__init__.py", line 7, in 
from _ctypes import Union, Structure, Array
ImportError: No module named '_ctypes'
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5#


Can anyone help point me in the right direction with this failure we
are seeing? We are stuck with python 3.5.6 for now due to the version of yocto 
we are using, though I'm concerned since this seems to be a fairly fundamental 
issue which is being exposed by this testcase.

Do let me know if you require any more information from me.


Many Thanks,
Peter.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/4QSCCSWUU76IYSARXKYKV7PHJKYA26BL/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Paul Moore 
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:35, Facundo Batista  wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
>
> Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
>
> (not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the
> rationale behind it)

I don't think there's been a formal decision, but I think the
expectation is that we just go to 3.10. Certainly PEP 602
(https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0602/) assumes that in the
description of the future release schedule.

Paul
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/OFVOOZT3OU4MSIGJ3ZR7DFSOATTSJMAM/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Victor Stinner 
It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..."
issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example:

$ python3
Python 3.7.5 (default, Oct 17 2019, 12:16:48)
>>> import sys
>>> sys.version_info = (4,0)
>>> import six
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "", line 1, in 
  File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/six.py", line 49, in 
string_types = basestring,
NameError: name 'basestring' is not defined

Victor

Le jeu. 28 nov. 2019 à 16:36, Facundo Batista
 a écrit :
>
> Hello!
>
> Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
>
> Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
>
> (not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the
> rationale behind it)
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> .Facundo
>
> Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/
> PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/
> Twitter: @facundobatista
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at 
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M5N3PZP4IUMKRZJKKJQA4IXK5VDX5MOP/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/



-- 
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/XLJDFJLIH4RSZQUYO3FSZO2EQTNLSJ4T/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Guido van Rossum 
Everybody has long presumed we'd go with 3.10. Maybe we're not following
semver to the letter, but this part of it we follow -- 4.0 would mean a
major rewrite or incompatible change.

For a long time I had hoped that Larry Hastings' Gilectomy project would
succeed, in which case that would be a logical candidate for 4.0, since it
requires a lot of incompatible C API changes. But Victor seems to have a
better plan for evolving the C API, and the Gilectomy doesn't seem to be
proceeding.

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:45 AM Paul Moore  wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:35, Facundo Batista 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
> >
> > Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
> >
> > (not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the
> > rationale behind it)
>
> I don't think there's been a formal decision, but I think the
> expectation is that we just go to 3.10. Certainly PEP 602
> (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0602/) assumes that in the
> description of the future release schedule.
>
> Paul
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/OFVOOZT3OU4MSIGJ3ZR7DFSOATTSJMAM/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*

___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/XKCLXKQWMPJ2DAKHU4DLPMRI3FK35OBN/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Guido van Rossum 
Hopefully by the time we actually *do* need to roll out 4.0, six will be
dead, or at least its Python 2 support will be gone. And whatever is needed
to make the upgrade smooth for people should be in in the 4.0 release, not
a 3rd party library.

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:53 AM Victor Stinner  wrote:

> It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..."
> issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example:
>
> $ python3
> Python 3.7.5 (default, Oct 17 2019, 12:16:48)
> >>> import sys
> >>> sys.version_info = (4,0)
> >>> import six
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "", line 1, in 
>   File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/six.py", line 49, in 
> string_types = basestring,
> NameError: name 'basestring' is not defined
>
> Victor
>
> Le jeu. 28 nov. 2019 à 16:36, Facundo Batista
>  a écrit :
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
> >
> > Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
> >
> > (not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the
> > rationale behind it)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --
> > .Facundo
> >
> > Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/
> > PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/
> > Twitter: @facundobatista
> > ___
> > Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> > Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M5N3PZP4IUMKRZJKKJQA4IXK5VDX5MOP/
> > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
>
>
> --
> Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death.
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/XLJDFJLIH4RSZQUYO3FSZO2EQTNLSJ4T/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*

___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/7YFKQV5G3F7BMA27G2PTT3VWMAH2IZU4/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: arm64 python 3.5.6 test case failure - ctypes/test/test_structures.py (test_pass_by_value)

2019-11-28 Thread Guido van Rossum 
Instead of trying random possibly related patches, why don't you use a
debugger and find out exactly what is going wrong? From your report it
doesn't seem that you have tried to do so already (apologies if you did and
I missed the hint).

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:41 AM Peter Morrow via Python-Dev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> Python-dev seemed to be the most appropriate email alias for this,
> though please do point me somewhere else if this is not appropriate.
>
> We are using a custom arm64 based distro built using yocto and as such
> we are currently using python 3.5.6.  We are hitting a failure in a
> python3 test case qemu running under QEMU that we would like to try to
> resolve if possible:
>
> root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 --version
> Python 3.5.6
> root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 ctypes/test/test_structures.py
> .Fs.
> ==
> FAIL: test_pass_by_value (__main__.StructureTestCase)
> --
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "ctypes/test/test_structures.py", line 419, in
> test_pass_by_value
> self.assertEqual(s.first, 0xdeadbeef)
> AssertionError: 195948557 != 3735928559
>
> --
> Ran 28 tests in 0.457s
>
> FAILED (failures=1, skipped=1)
> root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5#
>
> From searching the web I came across this bug which appears to match
> what we are seeing:
>
> https://bugs.python.org/issue29804 ("test_ctypes test_pass_by_value
> fails on arm64 (aarch64) architecture").
> However it looks like this fix is already in 3.5.6 so this isn't it.
>
> Next set of searching led me here:
>
> https://bugs.python.org/issue30353 and thus this patch:
>
>
> https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/9ba3aa4d02a110d1a1ea464a8aff3be7dd9c63c3
>
> So I applied this patch but we end up with this now:
>
> root@10:~# cd /usr/lib/python3.5/
> root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 ctypes/test/test_structures.py
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "ctypes/test/test_structures.py", line 2, in 
> from ctypes import *
>   File "/usr/lib/python3.5/ctypes/__init__.py", line 7, in 
> from _ctypes import Union, Structure, Array
> ImportError: No module named '_ctypes'
> root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5#
>
>
> Can anyone help point me in the right direction with this failure we
> are seeing? We are stuck with python 3.5.6 for now due to the version of
> yocto we are using, though I'm concerned since this seems to be a fairly
> fundamental issue which is being exposed by this testcase.
>
> Do let me know if you require any more information from me.
>
>
> Many Thanks,
> Peter.
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/4QSCCSWUU76IYSARXKYKV7PHJKYA26BL/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*

___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/CLHQ735VVPWURX6UN3HZY2Z7RJUL45TC/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Paul Moore 
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:55, Victor Stinner  wrote:
>
> It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..."
> issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example:

I've seen a few fixes to projects to remove assumptions that the "X"
in 3.X is a single digit. So I think that the momentum in the
community is definitely assuming 3.10 as well.

Paul
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/QVHT6RGNWITN5CEYXSG6CUBJKHEBMRAE/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: arm64 python 3.5.6 test case failure - ctypes/test/test_structures.py (test_pass_by_value)

2019-11-28 Thread Peter Morrow via Python-Dev 
On Thu, 2019-11-28 at 08:02 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Instead of trying random possibly related patches, why don't you use a debugger 
and find out exactly what is going wrong? From your report it doesn't seem that 
you have tried to do so already (apologies if you did and I missed the hint).

This is fair - let me do this.

Peter.



On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:41 AM Peter Morrow via Python-Dev 
mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Folks,

Python-dev seemed to be the most appropriate email alias for this,
though please do point me somewhere else if this is not appropriate.

We are using a custom arm64 based distro built using yocto and as such
we are currently using python 3.5.6.  We are hitting a failure in a python3 
test case qemu running under QEMU that we would like to try to resolve if 
possible:

root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 --version
Python 3.5.6
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 ctypes/test/test_structures.py
.Fs.
==
FAIL: test_pass_by_value (__main__.StructureTestCase)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "ctypes/test/test_structures.py", line 419, in
test_pass_by_value
self.assertEqual(s.first, 0xdeadbeef)
AssertionError: 195948557 != 3735928559

--
Ran 28 tests in 0.457s

FAILED (failures=1, skipped=1)
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5#

From searching the web I came across this bug which appears to match
what we are seeing:

https://bugs.python.org/issue29804
 ("test_ctypes test_pass_by_value
fails on arm64 (aarch64) architecture").
However it looks like this fix is already in 3.5.6 so this isn't it.

Next set of searching led me here:

https://bugs.python.org/issue30353
 and thus this patch:

https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/9ba3aa4d02a110d1a1ea464a8aff3be7dd9c63c3

So I applied this patch but we end up with this now:

root@10:~# cd /usr/lib/python3.5/
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5# python3 ctypes/test/test_structures.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "ctypes/test/test_structures.py", line 2, in 
from ctypes import *
  File "/usr/lib/python3.5/ctypes/__init__.py", line 7, in 
from _ctypes import Union, Structure, Array
ImportError: No module named '_ctypes'
root@10:/usr/lib/python3.5#


Can anyone help point me in the right direction with this failure we
are seeing? We are stuck with python 3.5.6 for now due to the version of yocto 
we are using, though I'm concerned since this seems to be a fairly fundamental 
issue which is being exposed by this testcase.

Do let me know if you require any more information from me.


Many Thanks,
Peter.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to 
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/4QSCCSWUU76IYSARXKYKV7PHJKYA26BL/
Code of Conduct: 
http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Brian Skinn 
I've appreciated Anthony Sottile's flake8-2020 plugin 
(https://pypi.org/project/flake8-2020/), which adds checks for a variety of 
misuses of sys.version and sys.version_info that would lead to breakage on a 
Python 4.0, and/or 10.0, in addition to Python 3.10.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/FHROEYFSPBWJQ2L7MX7I6G3NAG6WQBQJ/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Karthikeyan 
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 9:50 PM Paul Moore  wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:55, Victor Stinner  wrote:
> >
> > It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..."
> > issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example:
>
> I've seen a few fixes to projects to remove assumptions that the "X"
> in 3.X is a single digit. So I think that the momentum in the
> community is definitely assuming 3.10 as well.
>

CPython CI configuration itself had the assumption :
https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/14831 . I think there were some
issues raised with the title having [3.10] preparation for similar cases.

>
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JFQC43SLVKDO7WRBWLN5CJUOYWJOGBYO/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] buildbot.python.org database reset

2019-11-28 Thread Zachary Ware 
Hi all,

The database backing buildbot.python.org has been reset in order to
clean out old workers and builders, and to allow some relationships to
be created properly to allow future cleanups without resetting
everything.  This does unfortunately mean that old links are going to
be broken, including those to particular workers or builders since
they have all been renumbered.

Apologies for the inconvenience,
Zach
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/SKMYKKM3ZON3IW75P5VNXI34BYE4X323/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: Should we require all deprecations to have a removal version that we follow through on?

2019-11-28 Thread Brett Cannon 
Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 11/27/2019 10:38 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > What do people think of the idea of requiring all
> > deprecations specifying a version that the feature will be removed in 
> > (which under our
> > annual release cadence would be at least the third release from the start 
> > of the
> > deprecation, hence the deprecation being public for 2 years)? And that we 
> > also follow
> > through with that removal?
> > I would advocate for a plan in which removals happen every so many releases 
> > -- in
> other words, if a removal release is being prepped and a feature has been 
> deprecated for
> at least two cycles, toss it.  With a yearly cadence I would suggest every 5 
> years.
> I.E.
> deprecated   removed
> 
> 3.6  3.10
> 3.7  3.10
> 3.8  3.10
> 3.9  3.15
> 3.10 3.15
> This way folks know that upgrading from 3.8 to 3.9 should be painless,

But there is other things that might break your code between releases, such as 
bug fixes, language changes that become the default, etc. Are deprecations the 
biggest pain point in transitioning to a new Python version for people, or is 
it just part of a greater culmination of changes?

> but going to
> 3.10 will require more careful search for deprecations.  It also serves as a 
> reminder for
> us to double-check for needed removals on */5 releases.

For some reason this makes the "clean up" release feel like an anti-LTS because 
it's like, "3.9 works, 3.10 works, 3.11 works, 3.12 works, 3.13 works, 3.14 
works, boom!"
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZCZHVLN72RWKSJREZAZACFCF3WVT6F3V/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: Should we require all deprecations to have a removal version that we follow through on?

2019-11-28 Thread Eric Fahlgren 
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 10:02 AM Brett Cannon  wrote:

> But there is other things that might break your code between releases,
> such as bug fixes, language changes that become the default, etc. Are
> deprecations the biggest pain point in transitioning to a new Python
> version for people, or is it just part of a greater culmination of changes?
>

I just started the 3.7 -> 3.8 migration on our codebase yesterday, so this
is fresh in my mind (about 500k LOC with 72 external packages plus four
home-built extension modules, three of which use SWIG wrapping).  My
biggest pain point is making the external extension modules work due to API
changes; deprecations are only a minor issue, although that's probably
because we turn all warnings on during development and clean things up as
soon as they appear (if there are any win32.pywintypes devs listening, fix
that use of the old imp module at line 2).

Things I fixed quickly include some int vs float warnings in our GUI code,
replacing the call to create a new CodeType object with a code.replace, and
repair some SyntaxWarnings where "is" had crept into places where "=="
should have been used.  So, all good improvements to the code and I've
spent far longer thus far on other aspects of the porting.

I would be on the side of "sooner is better", with three releases of
deprecated, we-really-mean-it and gone.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/MAPZHRVXLWLOOEP2US3P6UUNFN6JWPKS/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Facundo Batista 
El jue., 28 de nov. de 2019 a la(s) 12:35, Facundo Batista
([email protected]) escribió:

> Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
>
> Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)

Thanks everybody for the responses.

So 3.10 it is, not a hard made decision, but the collective trend.

Should we have a PEP for this?

-- 
.Facundo

Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/
PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/
Twitter: @facundobatista
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JXCEWN6MI7OMUAMCRJEKNSDPXTAKGBIL/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Barry Warsaw 
On Nov 28, 2019, at 07:50, Guido van Rossum  wrote:
> 
> Everybody has long presumed we'd go with 3.10. Maybe we're not following 
> semver to the letter, but this part of it we follow -- 4.0 would mean a major 
> rewrite or incompatible change.
> 
> For a long time I had hoped that Larry Hastings' Gilectomy project would 
> succeed, in which case that would be a logical candidate for 4.0, since it 
> requires a lot of incompatible C API changes. But Victor seems to have a 
> better plan for evolving the C API, and the Gilectomy doesn't seem to be 
> proceeding.

I’ve always expected that 4.0 would be reserved for such incompatible C API 
changes.

I remember we had a similar discussion when 2.7.x was rolling over to x > 9.  
We didn’t bump it to 2.8 then, so I think we should just be prepared for Python 
3.10 when the time comes.

-Barry



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZGBP55Q7XQZAP5ZSDNCTBZZ5NYEMBXPA/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Nick Coghlan 
On Fri., 29 Nov. 2019, 6:15 am Facundo Batista, 
wrote:

> El jue., 28 de nov. de 2019 a la(s) 12:35, Facundo Batista
> ([email protected]) escribió:
>
> > Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
> >
> > Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
>
> Thanks everybody for the responses.
>
> So 3.10 it is, not a hard made decision, but the collective trend.
>
> Should we have a PEP for this?
>

We will at least have the 3.10 release schedule PEP, and the accepted
release cadence change PEP uses 3.10 in its examples, but it's probably a
good idea to have a short "Handle double-digit minor release numbers" PEP
that explicitly summarises the compatibility issues that are likely to
arise.

https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0598/#why-not-switch-directly-to-full-semantic-versioning
touched on the topic during the release cadence change discussion, but the
final set of PEPs for that (602, 605, 607) all took it for granted that
we'd be publishing 3.10 after 3.9.

Cheers,
Nick.

P.S. In addition to the flake8 plugin, Anthony Sottile also published
https://github.com/asottile/python3.10 to help with checking compatibility
in advance.


>
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/6JE5UQZJTX6UW4C7BSNO7HPQ3G7V7XOA/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: Should we require all deprecations to have a removal version that we follow through on?

2019-11-28 Thread Nick Coghlan 
On Thu., 28 Nov. 2019, 4:43 am Brett Cannon,  wrote:

> What do people think of the idea of requiring all deprecations specifying
> a version that the feature will be removed in (which under our annual
> release cadence would be at least the third release from the start of the
> deprecation, hence the deprecation being public for 2 years)? And that we
> also follow through with that removal?
>
> Now I'm not suggesting it **must** be in three feature releases. A
> deprecation could be set to Python 4 if people truly feel keeping the code
> is as easy it gets in terms of maintenance and there's enough usage to
> warrant such a potential indefinite deprecation/maintenance while keeping
> the code and docs alive (basically "there are better ways to do this, but
> this works fine, too, if you were already using it").


As long as it's optional, a new deprecation helper that automatically
escalated to FutureWarning in X.Y.0a0, and an outright error in X.Y.0b0
seems like a good idea to me.

(Escalating to errors as soon as the version number changes would be a
problem from a development process point of view)

If we don't add a helper API, then this sounds like a restatement of the
status quo to me, rather than a change in policy.

Cheers,
Nick.



>
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/AR54K6HOS6IH5TSXLOOPJ5YM2YYSLURS/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Guido van Rossum 
I presume that would be an informational PEP, right?

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 2:53 PM Nick Coghlan  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri., 29 Nov. 2019, 6:15 am Facundo Batista, 
> wrote:
>
>> El jue., 28 de nov. de 2019 a la(s) 12:35, Facundo Batista
>> ([email protected]) escribió:
>>
>> > Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
>> >
>> > Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
>>
>> Thanks everybody for the responses.
>>
>> So 3.10 it is, not a hard made decision, but the collective trend.
>>
>> Should we have a PEP for this?
>>
>
> We will at least have the 3.10 release schedule PEP, and the accepted
> release cadence change PEP uses 3.10 in its examples, but it's probably a
> good idea to have a short "Handle double-digit minor release numbers" PEP
> that explicitly summarises the compatibility issues that are likely to
> arise.
>
>
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0598/#why-not-switch-directly-to-full-semantic-versioning
> touched on the topic during the release cadence change discussion, but the
> final set of PEPs for that (602, 605, 607) all took it for granted that
> we'd be publishing 3.10 after 3.9.
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> P.S. In addition to the flake8 plugin, Anthony Sottile also published
> https://github.com/asottile/python3.10 to help with checking
> compatibility in advance.
>
>
>>
>> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/6JE5UQZJTX6UW4C7BSNO7HPQ3G7V7XOA/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*

___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/LTXPBACE6VDL5IP23ZNGONJ5TJ3AAHQN/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 or 4.0?

2019-11-28 Thread Nick Coghlan 
On Fri., 29 Nov. 2019, 9:10 am Guido van Rossum,  wrote:

> I presume that would be an informational PEP, right?
>

I hadn't considered that, but you're right, an Informational PEP would make
sense: there's no new decision to be made, we just want a clear place to
capture the rationale and the anticipated issues.

Cheers,
Nick.


>
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/NVGBV4PNU5B6M6WVJNC6LO7I4RPPEEDX/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/