Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
kapo coulibaly wrote: > How about sticking with shell? Using the shell frequently results in scripts which don't work reliably on Unix or at all on Windows. It's also a horrible language for anything beyond the simplest tasks. -- Glynn Clements ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
You can always use shell. But this is a question about 1) the graphical interface, and 2) python libraries for advanced commands and use in scripting. Michael C. Michael Barton Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change Arizona State University voice: 480-965-6262 (SHESC), 480-727-9746 (CSDC) fax: 480-965-7671 (SHESC), 480-727-0709 (CSDC) www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton, http://csdc.asu.edu On Mar 20, 2013, at 10:31 AM, kapo coulibaly wrote: > How about sticking with shell? We wouldn't worry about endless version issues. > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Pietro wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Michael Barton > wrote: > > My understanding is that Python 3 is not backward compatible with Python 2. > > it is true, but we are not talking to require python3 instead of > python2, we are talking to require python2.6 instead of python2.4, > that it is not backward compatible. > > Changing python2.4 in python2.6 allow us to start preparing the code > to reduce the gap between python2 and python3. Therefore if one day in > the 2016 or later (may be for GRASS8), we decide to switch definitely > to python3 we should be able to switch without too much effort. > > Pietro > ___ > grass-user mailing list > grass-user@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user > ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
How about sticking with shell? We wouldn't worry about endless version issues. On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Pietro wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Michael Barton > wrote: > > My understanding is that Python 3 is not backward compatible with Python > 2. > > it is true, but we are not talking to require python3 instead of > python2, we are talking to require python2.6 instead of python2.4, > that it is not backward compatible. > > Changing python2.4 in python2.6 allow us to start preparing the code > to reduce the gap between python2 and python3. Therefore if one day in > the 2016 or later (may be for GRASS8), we decide to switch definitely > to python3 we should be able to switch without too much effort. > > Pietro > ___ > grass-user mailing list > grass-user@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user > ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
Hi Michael, On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Michael Barton wrote: > My understanding is that Python 3 is not backward compatible with Python 2. it is true, but we are not talking to require python3 instead of python2, we are talking to require python2.6 instead of python2.4, that it is not backward compatible. Changing python2.4 in python2.6 allow us to start preparing the code to reduce the gap between python2 and python3. Therefore if one day in the 2016 or later (may be for GRASS8), we decide to switch definitely to python3 we should be able to switch without too much effort. Pietro ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
My understanding is that Python 3 is not backward compatible with Python 2. Michael Barton School of Human Evolution &Social Change Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity Arizona State University ...Sent from my iPad On Mar 20, 2013, at 8:26 AM, "Anna Kratochvílová" wrote: > Minimum wxPython version is changed in r55466 (I hope I haven't missed > any other places). > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Pietro wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Newcomb, Doug wrote: >>> By at least, do you mean looking at 2.6, 2.7 or 3.0 as well? >> >> +1 for python 2.6 that it is the default version in debian stable [0]... >> >> >> Moreover, the Python 2.6 [1] added compatibility functions in a >> future_builtins module and a -3 switch to warn about usages that will >> become unsupported in 3.0... >> Therefore if we require python2.6, we can start to think about >> cleaning the python code and start to use the "future_builtins" >> modules. > > Yes, python3 is probably inevitable so we should prepare for it. > >> >> Concerning GRASS and python 3.X, I think that the biggest problem is >> the WxPython, at the moment only the develop version Phoneix[2] it is >> working with python 3. > > I think a lot of other projects are in the same situation so I hope > Phoenix will become more stable soon. It will take some time to update > wxGUI to work with it but in theory there shouldn't be any major > problems. A lot of small problems will appear, often because some > parts of the gui code is a mess (usually some gui layout parts) and > the newer wxPython doesn't accept it. > > > So any other opinions on Python version? > > Anna ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
Minimum wxPython version is changed in r55466 (I hope I haven't missed any other places). On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Pietro wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Newcomb, Doug wrote: >> By at least, do you mean looking at 2.6, 2.7 or 3.0 as well? > > +1 for python 2.6 that it is the default version in debian stable [0]... > > > Moreover, the Python 2.6 [1] added compatibility functions in a > future_builtins module and a -3 switch to warn about usages that will > become unsupported in 3.0... > Therefore if we require python2.6, we can start to think about > cleaning the python code and start to use the "future_builtins" > modules. Yes, python3 is probably inevitable so we should prepare for it. > > Concerning GRASS and python 3.X, I think that the biggest problem is > the WxPython, at the moment only the develop version Phoneix[2] it is > working with python 3. I think a lot of other projects are in the same situation so I hope Phoenix will become more stable soon. It will take some time to update wxGUI to work with it but in theory there shouldn't be any major problems. A lot of small problems will appear, often because some parts of the gui code is a mess (usually some gui layout parts) and the newer wxPython doesn't accept it. So any other opinions on Python version? Anna ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Newcomb, Doug wrote: > By at least, do you mean looking at 2.6, 2.7 or 3.0 as well? +1 for python 2.6 that it is the default version in debian stable [0]... Moreover, the Python 2.6 [1] added compatibility functions in a future_builtins module and a -3 switch to warn about usages that will become unsupported in 3.0... Therefore if we require python2.6, we can start to think about cleaning the python code and start to use the "future_builtins" modules. Concerning GRASS and python 3.X, I think that the biggest problem is the WxPython, at the moment only the develop version Phoneix[2] it is working with python 3. Pietro [0] http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/python [1] http://docs.python.org/release/2.6.4/whatsnew/2.6.html [2] http://wiki.wxpython.org/ProjectPhoenix ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
Good question, maybe a roadmap ending (so far with Python 3 for Grass 8 (funny to mention this version number !) On 20 March 2013 17:32, Newcomb, Doug wrote: > By at least, do you mean looking at 2.6, 2.7 or 3.0 as well? > > Doug > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Michael Barton > wrote: >> >> I think that this is a good idea for GRASS 7. We shouldn't really do it >> with GRASS 6. >> >> I like going to at least Python 2.5 also. >> >> Michael >> __ >> C. Michael Barton >> Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity >> Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change >> Arizona State University >> Tempe, AZ 85287-2402 >> USA >> >> voice: 480-965-6262 (SHESC), 480-727-9746 (CSDC) >> fax: 480-965-7671(SHESC), 480-727-0709 (CSDC) >> www: http://csdc.asu.edu, http://shesc.asu.edu >> http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton >> >> On Mar 19, 2013, at 10:58 AM, >> wrote: >> >> From: Anna Kratochvílová >> Subject: [GRASS-user] minimal wxPython version >> Date: March 19, 2013 6:39:33 AM MST >> To: GRASS-dev , GRASS user list >> >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to change minimal required version of wxPython [1]. >> Currently we support (theoretically) version 2.8.1.1 (released 2007). >> I suggest to change it to 2.8.10.1 (2009), for example 2.8.10.1 was >> shipped with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. The reason is obvious: wxGUI is limited >> by this requirement. Even the 2.8.10.1 version is pretty old so I >> think this won't hurt anybody. Any objections? >> >> [1] http://grass.osgeo.org/grass70/source/snapshot/REQUIREMENTS.html >> >> >> PS - There is a similar problem with Python version (required 2.4). >> Some interesting features start with 2.5 but usually we can live >> without it. Any opinions? >> >> >> >> ___ >> grass-dev mailing list >> grass-...@lists.osgeo.org >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev > > > > > -- > Doug Newcomb > USFWS > Raleigh, NC > 919-856-4520 ext. 14 doug_newc...@fws.gov > - > The opinions I express are my own and are not representative of the official > policy of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service or Dept. of the Interior. Life > is too short for undocumented, proprietary data formats. > > ___ > grass-dev mailing list > grass-...@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev -- Yann Chemin Researcher@IWMI Skype/FB: yann.chemin ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] [GRASS-dev] minimal wxPython version
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 02:39:33PM +0100, Anna Kratochvílová wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to change minimal required version of wxPython [1]. >> Currently we support (theoretically) version 2.8.1.1 (released 2007). >> I suggest to change it to 2.8.10.1 (2009), for example 2.8.10.1 was >> shipped with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. The reason is obvious: wxGUI is limited >> by this requirement. Even the 2.8.10.1 version is pretty old so I >> think this won't hurt anybody. Any objections? > > epel 5 (add-on repository for rhel 5, the oldest still maintained rhel > distribution) has 2.8.12. I am not sure that more conservative > repositories have this version, but at least it is available in one > repository with a sufficiently high version. > Another old but still maintained repository, ports for FreeBSD 8.3, has python 2.7 and wxpython 2.8.12. No objections. Markus M ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
