Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Georg Brandl]

Am 22.06.2010 01:01, schrieb Terry Reedy:
 On 6/21/2010 3:59 PM, Steve Holden wrote:
 Terry Reedy wrote:
 On 6/21/2010 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:

 P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
 line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
 switch and make a 3.x version of the docs the default?

 Easy. When 3.2 is released. When 2.7 is released, 3.2 becomes 'trunk'.
 Trunk released always take over docs.python.org. To do otherwise would
 be to say that 3.2 is not a real trunk release and not yet ready for
 real use -- a major slam.

 Actually, I thought this was already discussed and decided ;-).

 This also gives the 2.7 release it's day in the sun before relegation to
 maintenance status.
 
 Every new version (except 3.0 and 3.1) has gone to maintenance status 
 *and* becomes the featured release on docs.python.org the day it was 
 released.  2.7 would just spend less time as the featured release on 
 that page.

I'm not sure 3.2 should take over in December just yet.  (There's also
docs3.python.org that always lands at the latest 3.x documentation).

However, there will be enough time to discuss this when 3.2 is actually
about to be released.

Georg


-- 
Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less.
Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy
indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou
two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

On 6/27/2010 5:44 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:

Am 22.06.2010 01:01, schrieb Terry Reedy:

On 6/21/2010 3:59 PM, Steve Holden wrote:

Terry Reedy wrote:

On 6/21/2010 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:


P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
switch and make a 3.x version of the docs the default?


Easy. When 3.2 is released. When 2.7 is released, 3.2 becomes 'trunk'.
Trunk released always take over docs.python.org. To do otherwise would
be to say that 3.2 is not a real trunk release and not yet ready for
real use -- a major slam.

Actually, I thought this was already discussed and decided ;-).


This also gives the 2.7 release it's day in the sun before relegation to
maintenance status.


Every new version (except 3.0 and 3.1) has gone to maintenance status
*and* becomes the featured release on docs.python.org the day it was
released.  2.7 would just spend less time as the featured release on
that page.


I'm not sure 3.2 should take over in December just yet.  (There's also
docs3.python.org that always lands at the latest 3.x documentation).

However, there will be enough time to discuss this when 3.2 is actually
about to be released.


Sure. Since I expect that the argument for treating 3.2 as a regular 
production-use-ready release will be stronger then than now, I agree on 
differing discussion.


--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Martin v. Löwis]

Am 21.06.2010 17:13, schrieb Stephan Richter:
 On Monday, June 21, 2010, Nick Coghlan wrote:
 A decent listing of major packages that already support Python 3 would
 be very handy for the new Python2orPython3 page I created on the wiki,
 and easier to keep up-to-date. (the old Early2to3Migrations page
 didn't look particularly up to date, but hopefully we can keep the new
 list in a happier state).
 
 I really just want to be able to go to PyPI, Click on Browse packages and 
 then select Python 3 (it can currently be accomplished by clicking Python 
 and then  3). 

Or you can use the link Python 3 packages on PyPI's main menu.

Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

Sure. Since I expect that the argument for treating 3.2 as a regular
production-use-ready release will be stronger then than now, I agree on
differing discussion.


I meant 'deferring'

--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Nick Coghlan]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be wrote:
 Okay cool, we fixed it: http://python-commandments.org/python3.html

 People are otherwise happy with the text?

Yep, looks pretty good to me.

I hope you don't mind, but I actually borrowed your text to seed a
corresponding page on the Python wiki:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python2orPython3

It turns out the beginner's guide on the wiki doesn't even acknowledge
the possibility of downloading Python 3.1 rather than 2.6 to start
experimenting with Python.

The Wiki is probably a good place for this kind of material, anyway -
it makes it much easier for people to update as they identify major
third party libraries that do and don't have Py3k compatible versions
(and, some day, Python2 compatible versions).

Cheers,
Nick.

P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
switch and make a 3.x version of the docs the default? We probably
won't need to seriously consider that question until the 3.3. time
frame though).

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Arc Riley]

I would suggest that if packages that do not have Python 3 support yet are
listed, then their alternatives should also.

PyQt has had Py3 support for some time.
PostgreSQL and SQLite do (as does SQLAlchemy)
CherryPy has had Py3 support for the last release cycle
libxml2 does not, but lxml does.

Also, under where it mentions that most OS's do not include Python 3, it
should be noted which have good support for it.  Gentoo (for example) has
excellent support for Python 3, automatically installing Python packages
which have Py3 support for both Py2 and Py3, and the python-based Portage
package system runs cleanly on Py2.6, Py3.1 and Py3.2.

Give credit where credit is due. :-)


On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be
 wrote:
  Okay cool, we fixed it: http://python-commandments.org/python3.html
 
  People are otherwise happy with the text?

 Yep, looks pretty good to me.

 I hope you don't mind, but I actually borrowed your text to seed a
 corresponding page on the Python wiki:
 http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python2orPython3

 It turns out the beginner's guide on the wiki doesn't even acknowledge
 the possibility of downloading Python 3.1 rather than 2.6 to start
 experimenting with Python.

 The Wiki is probably a good place for this kind of material, anyway -
 it makes it much easier for people to update as they identify major
 third party libraries that do and don't have Py3k compatible versions
 (and, some day, Python2 compatible versions).

 Cheers,
 Nick.

 P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
 line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
 switch and make a 3.x version of the docs the default? We probably
 won't need to seriously consider that question until the 3.3. time
 frame though).

 --
 Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
 ___
 Python-Dev mailing list
 Python-Dev@python.org
 http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
 Unsubscribe:
 http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/arcriley%40gmail.com

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Barry Warsaw]

On Jun 21, 2010, at 09:37 AM, Arc Riley wrote:

Also, under where it mentions that most OS's do not include Python 3, it
should be noted which have good support for it.  Gentoo (for example) has
excellent support for Python 3, automatically installing Python packages
which have Py3 support for both Py2 and Py3, and the python-based Portage
package system runs cleanly on Py2.6, Py3.1 and Py3.2.

We're trying to get there for Ubuntu (driven also by Debian).  We have Python
3.1.2 in main for Lucid, though we will probably not get 3.2 into Maverick
(the October 2010 release).  We're currently concentrating on Python 2.7 as a
supported version because it'll be released by then, while 3.2 will still be
in beta.

If you want to help, or have complaints, kudos, suggestions, etc. for Python
support on Ubuntu, you can contact me off-list.

-Barry


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Nick Coghlan]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Arc Riley arcri...@gmail.com wrote:
 I would suggest that if packages that do not have Python 3 support yet are
 listed, then their alternatives should also.

 PyQt has had Py3 support for some time.
 PostgreSQL and SQLite do (as does SQLAlchemy)
 CherryPy has had Py3 support for the last release cycle
 libxml2 does not, but lxml does.

 Also, under where it mentions that most OS's do not include Python 3, it
 should be noted which have good support for it.  Gentoo (for example) has
 excellent support for Python 3, automatically installing Python packages
 which have Py3 support for both Py2 and Py3, and the python-based Portage
 package system runs cleanly on Py2.6, Py3.1 and Py3.2.

 Give credit where credit is due. :-)

A decent listing of major packages that already support Python 3 would
be very handy for the new Python2orPython3 page I created on the wiki,
and easier to keep up-to-date. (the old Early2to3Migrations page
didn't look particularly up to date, but hopefully we can keep the new
list in a happier state).

It just ticked past midnight for me, so I'm off to bed, but for anyone
with a wiki account, have at it:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python2orPython3

(Updating the beginner's guide to recognise Python 3 as a valid option
would also be helpful: http://wiki.python.org/moin/BeginnersGuide)

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 09:57:30AM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
 On Jun 21, 2010, at 09:37 AM, Arc Riley wrote:
 
 Also, under where it mentions that most OS's do not include Python 3, it
 should be noted which have good support for it.  Gentoo (for example) has
 excellent support for Python 3, automatically installing Python packages
 which have Py3 support for both Py2 and Py3, and the python-based Portage
 package system runs cleanly on Py2.6, Py3.1 and Py3.2.
 
 We're trying to get there for Ubuntu (driven also by Debian).  We have Python
 3.1.2 in main for Lucid, though we will probably not get 3.2 into Maverick
 (the October 2010 release).  We're currently concentrating on Python 2.7 as a
 supported version because it'll be released by then, while 3.2 will still be
 in beta.
 
 If you want to help, or have complaints, kudos, suggestions, etc. for Python
 support on Ubuntu, you can contact me off-list.
 
nod Fedora 14 is about the same.  A nice to have thing that goes along
with these would be a table that has packages ported to python3 and which
distributions have the python3 version of the package.

Once most of the important third party packages are ported to python3 and in
the distributions, this table will likely become out-dated and probably
should be reaped but right now it's a very useful thing to see.

-Toshio


pgp4ovCkaMeKl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Arc Riley]

Personally, I'd like to celebrate the upcoming Python 3.2 release (which
will hopefully include 3to2) with moving all packages which do not have the
'Programming Language :: Python :: 3' classifier to a Legacy section of
PyPI and offer only Python 3 packages otherwise.  Of course put a banner at
the top clearly explaining that Python 2 packages can be found in the Legacy
section.

Radical, I know, but at some point we really need to make this move.

PyPI really needs a mechanism to cull out the moribund packages from being
displayed next to the actively maintained ones.  There's so many packages on
there that only work on Python 2.2-2.4 (for example), or with a specific
highly outdated version of another package, etc.


On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Stephan Richter stephan.rich...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Monday, June 21, 2010, Nick Coghlan wrote:
  A decent listing of major packages that already support Python 3 would
  be very handy for the new Python2orPython3 page I created on the wiki,
  and easier to keep up-to-date. (the old Early2to3Migrations page
  didn't look particularly up to date, but hopefully we can keep the new
  list in a happier state).

 I really just want to be able to go to PyPI, Click on Browse packages and
 then select Python 3 (it can currently be accomplished by clicking
 Python
 and then  3). Of course, package developers need to be encouraged to add
 these Trove classifiers so that the listings are as complete as possible.

 Regards,
 Stephan
 --
 Entrepreneur and Software Geek
 Google me. Zope Stephan Richter

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Arc Riley arcri...@gmail.com wrote:
 I would suggest that if packages that do not have Python 3 support yet are
 listed, then their alternatives should also.

Okay, this is being worked on.

 PyQt has had Py3 support for some time.

Added, as well as PySide.

 PostgreSQL and SQLite do (as does SQLAlchemy)

wrt Postgres: Is that psycopg2? Not sure what that's an alternative
to, since the 2.x list doesn't have any ORMs or database APIs at the
moment (unless Django counts).

 CherryPy has had Py3 support for the last release cycle

Okay, going to add it but can't right now because lots of people are editing.

 libxml2 does not, but lxml does.

That's okay, I don't think many people seriously use python-libxml2
anyway (using lxml instead) :-) Again, not sure what that would be an
alternative for though?

 Also, under where it mentions that most OS's do not include Python 3, it
 should be noted which have good support for it.  Gentoo (for example) has
 excellent support for Python 3, automatically installing Python packages
 which have Py3 support for both Py2 and Py3, and the python-based Portage
 package system runs cleanly on Py2.6, Py3.1 and Py3.2.

As Barry has pointed out 3.x is in many distros now, so in order to
not make people angry that their distro who also does the Right Thing
isn't mentioned (what's Arch do? py3k is easily available from AUR,
that's not really ArchLinux proper but every Arch user I've ever
talked to considers AUR an integral part), I added this:

Also, quite a few distributions have Python 3.x available already for
end-users, even if it's not the default interpreter.

I think that would make everyone happy, and the wiki article that much
more maintainable.


Thanks for your input,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
 nod Fedora 14 is about the same.  A nice to have thing that goes along
 with these would be a table that has packages ported to python3 and which
 distributions have the python3 version of the package.

Yeah, this is exactly why I'd prefer to not have to maintain a
specific list. Big distros are making Python 3.x available, it's not
the default interpreter yet anywhere (AFAIK?), but that's going to
happen in the next few releases of said distributions.

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Arc Riley arcri...@gmail.com wrote:
 Personally, I'd like to celebrate the upcoming Python 3.2 release (which
 will hopefully include 3to2) with moving all packages which do not have the
 'Programming Language :: Python :: 3' classifier to a Legacy section of
 PyPI and offer only Python 3 packages otherwise.  Of course put a banner at
 the top clearly explaining that Python 2 packages can be found in the Legacy
 section.

 Radical, I know, but at some point we really need to make this move.

I agree we have to make it at some point but I feel this is way, way too early.

thanks for your continued input,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

On 6/21/2010 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:


P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
switch and make a 3.x version of the docs the default?


Easy. When 3.2 is released. When 2.7 is released, 3.2 becomes 'trunk'. 
Trunk released always take over docs.python.org. To do otherwise would 
be to say that 3.2 is not a real trunk release and not yet ready for 
real use -- a major slam.


Actually, I thought this was already discussed and decided ;-).

Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

On 6/21/2010 11:31 AM, Arc Riley wrote:

Personally, I'd like to celebrate the upcoming Python 3.2 release (which
will hopefully include 3to2) with moving all packages which do not have
the 'Programming Language :: Python :: 3' classifier to a Legacy
section of PyPI and offer only Python 3 packages otherwise.  Of course
put a banner at the top clearly explaining that Python 2 packages can be
found in the Legacy section.


I do not think 2.x should be dissed any more than 3.x, which is to say, 
not at all. The impression I got from lurking on #python last night, in 
between disconnects, is that at least a couple of people feel that there 
is a move afoot to push people to Python3. Whether that had any 
connection to discussions here, I could not tell.


Having pypi.python.org/py2 and pypi.python.org/py3 though might be a 
good idea. Inquiries from either url would automatically filter. The 
counterargument is that there may be people looking for packages 
available for *both*.



Radical, I know, but at some point we really need to make this move.

PyPI really needs a mechanism to cull out the moribund packages from
being displayed next to the actively maintained ones.


The default ordering for search results is by rating.

  There's so many

packages on there that only work on Python 2.2-2.4 (for example), or
with a specific highly outdated version of another package, etc.


And there are people running those versions. I think better 
classification and filtering is the answer, though hard to mandate.


Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Stephan Richter]

On Monday, June 21, 2010, Nick Coghlan wrote:
 A decent listing of major packages that already support Python 3 would
 be very handy for the new Python2orPython3 page I created on the wiki,
 and easier to keep up-to-date. (the old Early2to3Migrations page
 didn't look particularly up to date, but hopefully we can keep the new
 list in a happier state).

I really just want to be able to go to PyPI, Click on Browse packages and 
then select Python 3 (it can currently be accomplished by clicking Python 
and then  3). Of course, package developers need to be encouraged to add 
these Trove classifiers so that the listings are as complete as possible.

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Entrepreneur and Software Geek
Google me. Zope Stephan Richter
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Barry Warsaw]

On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Stephan Richter wrote:

I really just want to be able to go to PyPI, Click on Browse packages and 
then select Python 3 (it can currently be accomplished by clicking Python 
and then  3). Of course, package developers need to be encouraged to add 
these Trove classifiers so that the listings are as complete as possible.

Trove classifiers are not particularly user friendly.  I wonder if we can help
with a (partially) automated or guided tool to help?  Maybe something on the
web page for packages w/o classifications, kind of like a Linked-in progress
meter...

-Barry


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Steve Holden]

Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
 On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
 nod Fedora 14 is about the same.  A nice to have thing that goes along
 with these would be a table that has packages ported to python3 and which
 distributions have the python3 version of the package.
 
 Yeah, this is exactly why I'd prefer to not have to maintain a
 specific list. Big distros are making Python 3.x available, it's not
 the default interpreter yet anywhere (AFAIK?), but that's going to
 happen in the next few releases of said distributions.
 
 On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Arc Riley arcri...@gmail.com wrote:
 Personally, I'd like to celebrate the upcoming Python 3.2 release (which
 will hopefully include 3to2) with moving all packages which do not have the
 'Programming Language :: Python :: 3' classifier to a Legacy section of
 PyPI and offer only Python 3 packages otherwise.  Of course put a banner at
 the top clearly explaining that Python 2 packages can be found in the Legacy
 section.

 Radical, I know, but at some point we really need to make this move.
 
 I agree we have to make it at some point but I feel this is way, way too 
 early.
 
 thanks for your continued input,
 Laurens

But it's never too early to plan for something you know to be
inevitable. More planning might have helped earlier on. I don't think
it's likely to hurt now.

regards
 Steve
-- 
Steve Holden   +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
See Python Video!   http://python.mirocommunity.org/
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS:http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/
All I want for my birthday is another birthday -
 Ian Dury, 1942-2000
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Steve Holden]

Terry Reedy wrote:
 On 6/21/2010 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
 
 P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
 line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
 switch and make a 3.x version of the docs the default?
 
 Easy. When 3.2 is released. When 2.7 is released, 3.2 becomes 'trunk'.
 Trunk released always take over docs.python.org. To do otherwise would
 be to say that 3.2 is not a real trunk release and not yet ready for
 real use -- a major slam.
 
 Actually, I thought this was already discussed and decided ;-).
 
This also gives the 2.7 release it's day in the sun before relegation to
maintenance status.

The Python 3 documents, when they become the default, should contain an
every-page link to the Python 2 documentation (though linkages may be a
problem - they could probably be done at a gross level).

regards
 Steve
-- 
Steve Holden   +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
See Python Video!   http://python.mirocommunity.org/
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS:http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/
All I want for my birthday is another birthday -
 Ian Dury, 1942-2000

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Stephan Richter]

On Monday, June 21, 2010, Barry Warsaw wrote:
   On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Stephan Richter wrote:
 I really just want to be able to go to PyPI, Click on Browse packages
 and  then select Python 3 (it can currently be accomplished by clicking
 Python and then  3). Of course, package developers need to be
 encouraged to add these Trove classifiers so that the listings are as
 complete as possible.
 
 Trove classifiers are not particularly user friendly.  I wonder if we can
 help with a (partially) automated or guided tool to help?  Maybe something
 on the web page for packages w/o classifications, kind of like a Linked-in
 progress meter...

Yeah that would be good. I thought the Score was something like that, but it 
is not transparent enough. It would be great, if PyPI would tell me how I can 
improve my package meta-data. (The Linked-in progress meter worked for me too. 
;-)

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Entrepreneur and Software Geek
Google me. Zope Stephan Richter
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Lennart Regebro]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 02:02, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
 After reading the discussion in the previous thread, signed in to #python
 and verified that the intro message starts with a lie about python3. I also
 verified that the official #python site links to Python Commandment Don't
 use Python 3… yet.

Well, it *should* say: If you need to ask if you should use Python 2
or Python 3, you probably are better off with Python 2 for the
moment. But that's a bit long. :-)

-- 
Lennart Regebro: http://regebro.wordpress.com/
Python 3 Porting: http://python3porting.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Lennart Regebro]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 18:20, Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be wrote:
 2.x or 3.x? http://tinyurl.com/py2or3

Wow. That's almost not an improvement... That link doesn't really help
anyone choose at all.

-- 
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Simon de Vlieger]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 21 jun 2010, at 23:03, Lennart Regebro wrote:

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 18:20, Laurens Van Houtven  
l...@laurensvh.be wrote:

2.x or 3.x? http://tinyurl.com/py2or3


Wow. That's almost not an improvement... That link doesn't really help
anyone choose at all.


Lennart,

That part of the topic will be replaced after all feedback is gathered  
on the new article Laurens provided at: http://python-commandments.org/python3.html 
 as stated earlier in this thread.


Regards,

Simon de Vlieger
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
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=hTod
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Lennart Regebro]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 23:26, Simon de Vlieger si...@ikanobori.jp wrote:
 That part of the topic will be replaced after all feedback is gathered on
 the new article Laurens provided at:
 http://python-commandments.org/python3.html as stated earlier in this
 thread.

OK, great, I missed that!

-- 
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 18:20, Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be wrote:
 2.x or 3.x? http://tinyurl.com/py2or3

 Wow. That's almost not an improvement... That link doesn't really help
 anyone choose at all.

 --
 Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
 http://regebro.wordpress.com/
 +33 661 58 14 64


Please read the rest of the thread: that's ancient information and no
longer the latest work. We just removed the thing that offended
people, so that the situation could be defused instantly and then we
could work towards something everyone liked in a calm and productive
environment.

Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

On 6/21/2010 3:59 PM, Steve Holden wrote:

Terry Reedy wrote:

On 6/21/2010 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:


P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
switch and make a 3.x version of the docs the default?


Easy. When 3.2 is released. When 2.7 is released, 3.2 becomes 'trunk'.
Trunk released always take over docs.python.org. To do otherwise would
be to say that 3.2 is not a real trunk release and not yet ready for
real use -- a major slam.

Actually, I thought this was already discussed and decided ;-).


This also gives the 2.7 release it's day in the sun before relegation to
maintenance status.


Every new version (except 3.0 and 3.1) has gone to maintenance status 
*and* becomes the featured release on docs.python.org the day it was 
released.  2.7 would just spend less time as the featured release on 
that page.



The Python 3 documents, when they become the default, should contain an
every-page link to the Python 2 documentation (though linkages may be a
problem - they could probably be done at a gross level).


docs.python.org contains links to docs to other releases, both past and 
future. There is no reason to treat 3.2 specially, or to junk up its 
pages. The 3.x docs have intentionally been cleaned of nearly all 
references to 2.x. The current 2.6 and 2.7 pages have no references to 
corresponding 3.1 pages.


Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be 
 wrote:
 Given the number of other links that are already in the status
 message, it would be really nice if the comment could be updated to
 something like:

 Is Python3 ready for me? http://python-commandments.org/python3.html;

Sounds like a great idea, I'll run it past the other folks.

 i.e. make it clear that this is a question where the answer will vary
 based on your use case, and provide a clear direction on where to get
 more information.

I think the reason #python regulars never saw this as a problem is
because people who actually ask do get this answer. At least they do
if Aaron, Allen, Brendon, Clovis, Stephen, Devin, me... (list of names
way too numerous to be exhaustive) are awake. Maybe the strong
language does scare people off from that critical
asking-for-more-information step, so yes, reviewing that would be a
good idea.

 There are always going to be differences in how different communities
 see the world and even the Python community is far too large to have
 a consistent point of view on almost any topic. So we'll likely have
 to muddle through with various ideas slowly percolating through to
 different parts of the community. That said, keeping in touch with the
 #python crew is certainly something we haven't paid much attention to
 in the past, but is probably just as important as staying in touch
 with major library developers and the developers of other
 implementations.

My thoughts exactly on both counts. Communication good, embrace heterogeneity :)

 Cheers,
 Nick.


Thanks for your input,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
 On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:33:35 +0200
 Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be wrote:
 Perhaps lower the tone a bit on http://pound-python.org/ ?
 “foremost support system for developing quality Python
 applications” ... “crack team of Python experts” ... “Your time won't
 be wasted by architecture astronauts or trivial repetitions of the
 docs”.

Noted, we'll say the same thing but differently.

 (I understand these are slightly tongue-in-cheek but, if this page is
 intented mainly for beginners, I think being descriptive is more
 valuable)

Yes, it is tongue-in-cheek, but perhaps a bit too much so :-) I didn't
write it, it just never struck me as a problem at the time. I think
the problem is that that page was created to fix a very specific
problem (explaining why #python isn't a search engine), and it
probably got written more out of something snapping than an attempt to
be informative.

 Also, mention other support options there - primarily comp.lang.python,
 of course, and the official documentation pages.

Will do.

 Regards

 Antoine.

Thanks for your input,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Nick Coghlan]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Nick Efford n.d.eff...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
 Not sure if I agree with you here; I regard people new to
 programming as the prime candidates for using Python 3.  Many of
 the language changes have the effect of making it significantly
 easier to learn for newcomers (I wrote about this a while ago -
 see http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html).

That's actually one of the better write-ups I've seen regarding
several of the key benefits of the Python 3 transition. They're easy
to lose sight of when discussing the topic with the existing
developers that are bearing the cost of converting their code due to
changes that were made primarily for the benefit of new users.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Steve Holden]

Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
 On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
 
 HoweverI have very little experience with IRC and consequently have
 little idea what getting a permanent, owned, channel like #python
 entails. Hence the '?' that follows.

 What do others think?
 
 Sure, this is a good idea.
 
 Technically speaking, this is extremely easy.  Somebody needs to /msg
 chanserv register #python3 and that's about it.  (In this case, that
 someone may need to be Brett Cannon, since he is the official group
 contact for Freenode regarding Python-related channels.)
 
 Practically speaking, you will need a group of at least a dozen
 contributors, each in a different timezone, who sit there all day
 answering questions :).  Otherwise the ownership of the channel is just
 a signpost pointing at an empty room.
 
Which is yet another reason I don't think it would be productive to
attempt any kind of pre-emptive action against the #python team. They do
serve a very useful purpose, and there is reasoned logic behind their
position even if we might wish it were different.

regards
 Steve

-- 
Steve Holden   +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
See Python Video!   http://python.mirocommunity.org/
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS:http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/
All I want for my birthday is another birthday -
 Ian Dury, 1942-2000

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Nick Efford n.d.eff...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
 Thanks for explaining your position on this so carefully,
 Laurens.  You've made many reasonable points which I hope will
 help to cool things down a little.

Cool, glad it's appreciated.

 Clearly, there are situations where it makes sense to advocate
 Python 2.X and other situations where people can be encouraged to
 consider Python 3.  The issues that potential users need to
 consider are too subtle to be represented fairly by the simple
 advice to 'avoid Python 3', so can we not all agree to remove
 it as a #python topic as a gesture of goodwill?

I like the idea of changing it to something that points to a more
detailed thing as someone suggested above. Ideally short and
completely neutral, like 2.x or 3.x? http://shorturl/whatever;.

 Nobody need change their opinions or adovacy as a result,

I very much doubt that'd happen anyway ;-)

 but it would have the benefit of presenting #python in a more
 neutral and inclusive light.

+1

 I've not used IRC much in the past, but if it would be useful for
 someone like myself - a longtime Python user but recent and
 enthusiastic Python 3 adopter - to offer my opinions and advice
 on the issue to newcomers then I'm certainly willing to get
 involved.

Everybody's very welcome, the entire reason I'm putting time into this
is because apparently some people felt less welcome than I'd like them
to feel :-)

 We're still telling people to use Python 2.x by default because of a
 few major things:

 1. going out on a limb here: well over 90% of those people are
 completely new to Python and out of those most of them completely new
 to programming too,

 Not sure if I agree with you here; I regard people new to
 programming as the prime candidates for using Python 3.  Many of
 the language changes have the effect of making it significantly
 easier to learn for newcomers (I wrote about this a while ago -
 see http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html).
 Also, people new to Python or programming in general won't have
 the burden of legacy code that needs to be converted.

Very nice read. Most points are indeed common questions, we just tell
people how to work around them in 2.x. ie, whenever someone posts
old-style classes, someone will always point out to them that they
really probably want new-style even if they don't get the difference
yet; for integer division we tell people to convert to float or from
__future__ import division, if you use print call it with exactly one
string and just build that string, never ever ever use input, just use
raw_input, that sort of stuff. Not always very clean, more of a
workaround. Also stuff like chevron print is actively discouraged in
favor of using a logging module or eg sys.stderr. Of course, in py3k
where you don't have to, which is even nicer :-)

I'm guessing it's okay to link to this from the newer, more neutral pages? :-)

 The only situation in which I'd direct someone new to programming
 away from Python 3 would be if they had a specific need to use a
 library that wasn't yet supported.

Yeah, I think the reason for that rule is that the majority of people
asking about new software actually start or end up in this category.
No statistics to back that up, but the regulars seem to agree (again,
maybe we're biased). See Steve Thorne (Jerub)'s post in a parallel
thread.

Usually it's because they want to do something that people have
already solved, and #python is pretty strict about discouraging
implementing software that already exists. Of course, as the porting
of Python 3.x packages progresses this point becomes more and more
moot. A possible solution is that we suggest that people, instead of
rolling their own thing from scratch, help to port an existing good
2.x lib to 3.x, or use 2.x? I don't think it's a good idea to start
encouraging NIH in new programmers :-)

 2. the nicest libraries for doing a lot of stuff aren't ported yet, or
 are in the process of being ported but not yet recommended for actual
 use by their authors, (this seems to be a point of contention?)

 This has certainly been the key issue for me.  Only in the past
 two or three months have we got to the point where I feel can commit
 to Python 3 fully.  Six months ago, I definitely could not have
 done so.  This is progress, and we need to be positive about it.

Yeah, that message has been in the /topic for _WAY_ longer than 6 months.


 Regards,


 Nick

Thank you very much for your input,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Steve Holden st...@holdenweb.com wrote:
 Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
 On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
 Which is yet another reason I don't think it would be productive to
 attempt any kind of pre-emptive action against the #python team. They do
 serve a very useful purpose, and there is reasoned logic behind their
 position even if we might wish it were different.

 regards
  Steve

I'm one of them so I'm a bit biased, but I'd say the biggest argument
is that it's not set in stone (I'm trying to fix it and the regulars
have been nothing but cooperative). Nobody from the #python people
realized this was a huge thing for people up until today. It's been up
there for a long time, and it's becoming less and less defensible
every passing day (and that's a good thing!), so we're basically
debating what ought to change and when. It's not really a matter of
disliking, it's more of a matter of um, it's still up there because
nobody thought it had to go :-)

FWIW: I think a separate #python3 channel would be a really bad idea.

thanks
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

Status update:

Topic now says:

NO LOL | Don't paste in here: use http://paste.pocoo.org/ |
http://pound-python.org/ | Include Python version in questions | 2.x or 3.x?
http://tinyurl.com/py2or3 | Tutorial: http://docs.python.org/tut/ | FAQ:
http://effbot.org/pyfaq/ | New Programmer? Read
http://tinyurl.com/thinkcspy2e | #python.web #wsgi #python-fr #python.de
#python-es #python.tw #python.pl #python-br #python-nl

Right now the shorturl points to the excellent
http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html by Nick Efford,
until we get the Py2.x vs Py3.x page as suggested above done, which
will hopefully be in the next few hours.

pound-python.org not touched yet because 1) the appropriate person
isn't available right now 2) it's not as pressing a matter as the
other thing.


Thanks again for everyone's input on all of python-dev, #python,
#python-offtopic,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Steve Holden]

Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
 Status update:
 
 Topic now says:
 
 NO LOL | Don't paste in here: use http://paste.pocoo.org/ |
 http://pound-python.org/ | Include Python version in questions | 2.x or 3.x?
 http://tinyurl.com/py2or3 | Tutorial: http://docs.python.org/tut/ | FAQ:
 http://effbot.org/pyfaq/ | New Programmer? Read
 http://tinyurl.com/thinkcspy2e | #python.web #wsgi #python-fr #python.de
 #python-es #python.tw #python.pl #python-br #python-nl
 
 Right now the shorturl points to the excellent
 http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html by Nick Efford,
 until we get the Py2.x vs Py3.x page as suggested above done, which
 will hopefully be in the next few hours.
 
 pound-python.org not touched yet because 1) the appropriate person
 isn't available right now 2) it's not as pressing a matter as the
 other thing.
 
 
 Thanks again for everyone's input on all of python-dev, #python,
 #python-offtopic,
 Laurens
 
And thanks for engaging so directly and responsively. The Python
community has impressed me again with its maturity.

regards
 Steve
-- 
Steve Holden   +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
See Python Video!   http://python.mirocommunity.org/
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS:http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/
All I want for my birthday is another birthday -
 Ian Dury, 1942-2000
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Martin v. Löwis]

Am 20.06.2010 18:20, schrieb Laurens Van Houtven:

2.x or 3.x?
http://tinyurl.com/py2or3


If you are interested, we could host any material that somebody would 
want to provide on http://python.org/py2or3 (which would be one letter 
shorter :-). We could also make this a redirect.


Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Laurens Van Houtven writes:
   The only situation in which I'd direct someone new to programming
   away from Python 3 would be if they had a specific need to use a
   library that wasn't yet supported.
  
  Yeah, I think the reason for that rule is that the majority of people
  asking about new software actually start or end up in this category.

I think that the most experienced people have absurdly high standards
for support compared to those new to programming.  I hope they check
their advice against the real requirements of the new programmer.

  Usually it's because they want to do something that people have
  already solved,

If they're new to programming, they're already in adventure mode.  Why
not point out the Road Less Traveled?  That will make all the
difference.  Of course you should point out that it's going to be
bumpier, and of course that is likely to push the majority of
practical folks back to Python 2.  But some of them are likely to be
willing to endure a bit of frustration, especially if they're told
that their bug reports will be listened to seriously on python-dev
(given help from an experienced hand in formatting them!)

  A possible solution is that we suggest that people, instead of
  rolling their own thing from scratch, help to port an existing good
  2.x lib to 3.x, or use 2.x?

Exactly.  Don't give them rose-colored glasses about porting, and warn
that some are just plain broken (eg, because of inappropriate
assumptions about bytes vs Unicode).  But on the other hand, some will
mostly work for them, and their bug reports on the corner cases will
be helpful.

  I don't think it's a good idea to start encouraging NIH in new
  programmers :-)

Agreed.

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Laurens Van Houtven writes:

  Also, I'm pretty sure nobody has ever said that Python 3.x was a
  failure, or anything like it. #python has claims that Python 3.x, as
  a platform for building production apps, is a work in progress

How about Python 3 is a work in progress for the topic?  That seems
to me to strike exactly the right balance, and encourage the
interested to ask the right kind of question.

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
turnb...@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp wrote:
 Laurens Van Houtven writes:

   Also, I'm pretty sure nobody has ever said that Python 3.x was a
   failure, or anything like it. #python has claims that Python 3.x, as
   a platform for building production apps, is a work in progress

 How about Python 3 is a work in progress for the topic?  That seems
 to me to strike exactly the right balance, and encourage the
 interested to ask the right kind of question.

I think even that's a bit too loaded, as a sign of goodwill I think
we're going to go with something completely neutral like 2.x vs 3.x.
But I'm not going to argue that ad nauseam because it's really just
bikeshedding.

thanks for your input
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Martin v. Löwis]

Am 20.06.2010 19:48, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull:

Laurens Van Houtven writes:

Also, I'm pretty sure nobody has ever said that Python 3.x was a
failure, or anything like it. #python has claims that Python 3.x, as
a platform for building production apps, is a work in progress

How about Python 3 is a work in progress for the topic?


I wouldn't say that, either - not more than Python 2 was a work in 
progress over the last 10 years.


Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
 Laurens Van Houtven writes:
   Yeah, I think the reason for that rule is that the majority of people
   asking about new software actually start or end up in this category.

 I think that the most experienced people have absurdly high standards
 for support compared to those new to programming.  I hope they check
 their advice against the real requirements of the new programmer.

Maybe. I'm not very sure about this: for example quite a few parts in
Twisted are pretty hazy voodoo magic to me ;-) I actually recommend
the high standards stuff to newbies specifically because it's high
standards. If I meet some bug, I can probably work around it, but I
imagine that it'd be much more frustrating for a newbie to come into
contact with a bunch of stuff that really isn't very well polished or
supported? I could be wrong.

   Usually it's because they want to do something that people have
   already solved,

 If they're new to programming, they're already in adventure mode.  Why
 not point out the Road Less Traveled?  That will make all the
 difference.  Of course you should point out that it's going to be
 bumpier, and of course that is likely to push the majority of
 practical folks back to Python 2.

Three big reasons I can think of: because it doesn't always exist,
because even if it does exist we don't always know about it, and
because people actually helping people in #python would be far less
adept at helping people with it :-) We have a bunch of people that end
up doing their own thing anyway now, that just means we can't be as
helpful later when they have more questions.

 But some of them are likely to be
 willing to endure a bit of frustration, especially if they're told
 that their bug reports will be listened to seriously on python-dev
 (given help from an experienced hand in formatting them!)

Maybe that would help, yeah. We have a bunch of people now that start
and then give up. They don't port, because they can't be bothered.
They just start from scratch.

   A possible solution is that we suggest that people, instead of
   rolling their own thing from scratch, help to port an existing good
   2.x lib to 3.x, or use 2.x?

 Exactly.  Don't give them rose-colored glasses about porting, and warn
 that some are just plain broken (eg, because of inappropriate
 assumptions about bytes vs Unicode).  But on the other hand, some will
 mostly work for them, and their bug reports on the corner cases will
 be helpful.

I think that's usually more effort than new programmers are willing to
put in, people tend to underestimate the cost of developing something
from scratch in my experience. But sure, we all agree it's a good
idea, so let's put it in the official thing about 2.x vs 3.x :)

   I don't think it's a good idea to start encouraging NIH in new
   programmers :-)

 Agreed.

I think we're kind of getting into the territory of personal preferences here.

Thanks for your input,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
 Am 20.06.2010 19:48, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull:
 How about Python 3 is a work in progress for the topic?

 I wouldn't say that, either - not more than Python 2 was a work in progress
 over the last 10 years.

 Regards,
 Martin

Yeah, this is why I really like a completely neutral topic.

thanks,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

On 6/20/2010 6:35 AM, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:


I'm one of the active people in #python that some people dislike for
behavior with respect to Python 3.


As I wrote, I disliked the observable, written behavior, now changed. 
You are obviously a fine person. We both love Python and have both 
contributed time for years to helping others with Python.


The premise for this branch thread was:
IF #python is really #python2 and somewhat anti-Python3,
THEN (and only then), maybe we need a #python3.

I am delighted that you have already refuted the premise with a new, 
much improved, splash topic. I now feel free to ask Python3 questions on 
the existing channel -- things like Is issue  applicable to 
Python3? -- as I work on reviewing tracker issues. In that respect, 
this thread is finished for me. But I hope it is just the start of 
better cooperation and communication.


Just a few notes in addition to other responses.


First of all I'd like to defuse the situation.


Excellently done.


Also, I'm pretty sure nobody has ever said that Python 3.x was a
failure, or anything like it.


I have no idea what has been said by you or anyone on #python, but 
people *have* posted on both python-list and here on py-dev things like 
Python3 is not ready for use. It is a failure. Do not use it. (any of 
that sound familiar? ;-) and even Python3 should be scrapped!. I am 
relieve that you have disassociated yourself and #python from such 
sentiments.


---
On newbies and version choice: I agree with Nick Efford that people 
using Python to learn about programming may be better off with Python3. 
I am using a subset of Python3 in a book on algorithms for the reasons 
he gave and others. Not even mentioned so far in this thread is the 
availability of unicode identifiers for people with non-Latin alphabets.


Of course, Asian schoolkids are unlikely to request help on #python. And 
the point about suggesting Python2 because that is what you all are good 
at helping with, is well taken. I do think people learning Python2 now 
should have a Python3-aware guide to doing so. This


 In the mean while, we encourage people to write code that will be easy
 to port and behave well in 3.x: new-style classes, don't use eager
 versions when the Py3k default is lazy and you don't actually need the
 eager thing, use as many third party libraries as possible (the idea
 being that this would minimize effort needed to make the switch on the
 grand scale of things), use absolute imports always (and only explicit
 relative, but it's discouraged), always have a full unit test suite.

is a good start. I think something like that would be good for the 
#python web page, or added to python.org somewhere.


Terry Jan Reedy


___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Simon de Vlieger]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

In reply to the recent post by Laurens and the vow I made to change  
the text which is presented on the python-commandments domain I have  
asked Laurens to write a new text on the subject.


This message is a heads up to let all of you know that this new  
article is now available on the following URL: http://python-commandments.org/python3.html


This article will probably be the featured article on #python's /topic  
regarding Python 2 or 3.


I also read some remarks about possibly having an official article up  
on the Python website and in case that happens that will take the  
place of this article.


Regards,

Simon de Vlieger

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
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=qRiB
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

Glad to hear the efforts are so appreciated. Unfortunately not
everyone agrees, but I'm beginning to think that's the tragedy of
internet politics :)

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
 On 6/20/2010 6:35 AM, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
 I have no idea what has been said by you or anyone on #python, but people
 *have* posted on both python-list and here on py-dev things like Python3 is
 not ready for use. It is a failure. Do not use it. (any of that sound
 familiar? ;-) and even Python3 should be scrapped!. I am relieve that you
 have disassociated yourself and #python from such sentiments.

I can understand how people coming to #python might have thought that,
in retrospect. I just wanted to make that part clear :) As for the
Python 3.x is a failure people, I just tune those out, and if
they're trolling about it on IRC, ban them.

 On newbies and version choice: I agree with Nick Efford that people using
 Python to learn about programming may be better off with Python3. I am using
 a subset of Python3 in a book on algorithms for the reasons he gave and
 others. Not even mentioned so far in this thread is the availability of
 unicode identifiers for people with non-Latin alphabets.

I think the difference here is probably the focus. I think you're more
interested in teaching people Python in a more academic context:
basically teaching CS through Python. #python, on the other hand, is
trying to help people build practical tools where the CS is often an
afterthought (though not as much as it is in other programming
language channels which I won't name).

 In the mean while, we encourage people to write code that will be easy
 to port and behave well in 3.x: new-style classes, don't use eager
 versions when the Py3k default is lazy and you don't actually need the
 eager thing, use as many third party libraries as possible (the idea
 being that this would minimize effort needed to make the switch on the
 grand scale of things), use absolute imports always (and only explicit
 relative, but it's discouraged), always have a full unit test suite.

 is a good start. I think something like that would be good for the #python
 web page, or added to python.org somewhere.

Yeah, it's actually extremely prevalent, it's just not voiced
anywhere, we could probably put it up somewhere. It's sort of up in
the pound-python page but it's well-hidden in tongue-in-cheek, as
Antoine pointed out :)

 Terry Jan Reedy


Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

That's not actually up just yet, I'd like people to review it,
personally I think it's still a tad bit biased towards Py3k. Until
then I'm keeping the Py3.x document by Nick Efford up there.

Thanks for your continued participation and seemingly endless patience,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Nick Coghlan]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Simon de Vlieger si...@ikanobori.jp wrote:
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 In reply to the recent post by Laurens and the vow I made to change the text
 which is presented on the python-commandments domain I have asked Laurens to
 write a new text on the subject.

 This message is a heads up to let all of you know that this new article is
 now available on the following URL:
 http://python-commandments.org/python3.html

That's a fairly decent write-up in my opinion. As Laurens pointed, it
trends towards the use Python 3 if you can, Python 2 if you need to
point of view, which I personally think is the right spin to be
putting on this issue, but obviously opinions will vary on that front.

About the only specific wording tweak I would suggest is that little
regard for backwards compatibility should be phrased as less regard
for backwards compatibility. There were still quite a few ideas we
rejected as gratuitously incompatible, even for Py3k (the eventual
decision to retain old-style string formatting comes to mind).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

On 6/20/2010 5:53 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Simon de Vliegersi...@ikanobori.jp  wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

In reply to the recent post by Laurens and the vow I made to change the text
which is presented on the python-commandments domain I have asked Laurens to
write a new text on the subject.



That's a fairly decent write-up in my opinion. As Laurens pointed, it
trends towards the use Python 3 if you can, Python 2 if you need to
point of view, which I personally think is the right spin to be
putting on this issue, but obviously opinions will vary on that front.

About the only specific wording tweak I would suggest is that little
regard for backwards compatibility should be phrased as less regard
for backwards compatibility. There were still quite a few ideas we
rejected as gratuitously incompatible, even for Py3k (the eventual
decision to retain old-style string formatting comes to mind).


I have much the same opinion, and the ame suggestion, as Nick. People do 
not usually see the proposals that were rejected and the changes not 
made in 3.0. For those who *do* wish, there are about 25 items listed at


http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3099/
Things that will Not Change in Python 3000

Nick listed one thing not on the list. Eliminating the duplicate method 
names in the unittest module is another. (In isolation, most everyone 
was in favor. Guido's reason for leaving the duplication: porting 2 to 3 
is much easier with a good (and stable) test suite. Therefore, cleaning 
up unittest and possibly breaking test suites, even with a 2to3 
conversion, would not be a good idea.)


Terry Jan Reedy



___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Simon de Vlieger]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 20 jun 2010, at 23:53, Nick Coghlan wrote:


About the only specific wording tweak I would suggest is that little
regard for backwards compatibility should be phrased as less regard
for backwards compatibility. There were still quite a few ideas we
rejected as gratuitously incompatible, even for Py3k (the eventual
decision to retain old-style string formatting comes to mind).


I have changed this text to include the wording tweak.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
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=NcT9
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

Okay cool, we fixed it: http://python-commandments.org/python3.html

People are otherwise happy with the text?

Thanks for your continued input,
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

Hello,



I'm one of the active people in #python that some people dislike for
behavior with respect to Python 3.

First of all I'd like to defuse the situation, much like Jacob.
Seriously. It's been a bunch of posts so far and most of them have
been pretty angry. Let's take a deep breath and try to fix the
situation that's getting people frustrated like grownups :-) (FWIW: I
find being called worse than half-intelligent pretty offensive. Let's
stop doing that?)

The idea being expressed in the IRC topic is _way_ bigger than the
room an IRC topic gives you. Yes, it's an imperfect medium, yes, it's
probably partially based on the use case: it's just that experience
leads us to believe that the vast majority of use cases ends up being
more in 2.x turf then 3.x turf, at the very least in the past.

I'm sorry if you had the impression people wanted to nail you at the
stake for using Python 3. If that's how you felt, it isn't true. I
basically agree with Glyph. I don't think we've recently (I'm not
omnipresent) told anyone who had any good reasons to to stop using
Python 3. If someone's doing work that actually needs Python 3 (most
recent example a GSOC student porting Sphinx), we try our best to
help, and AFAICT we've mostly been successful. (Please correct me if
you think this is erroneous.). We don't get too many people that
actually want or need that, but I'm guessing that's mostly because
people porting libraries to py3k usually already know what they're
doing so they don't need the first-line-of-defense thing for Python
questions that #python tries to be.

Maybe you disagree on what good reasons are. #python is a bunch of
volunteers giving help, free of charge, which is usually of a pretty
high standard because they're professional Python developers and have
been for a long time. Maybe that biases some of us against Py3k? Fact
remains that there's a bunch of active people on IRC who pour a lot of
time and effort into #python and make a lot of newbies really happy,
and I think the picture you're painting based on a single issue that
clearly not everyone agrees on is a bit disrespectful and somewhat
unfair.

Also, I'm pretty sure nobody has ever said that Python 3.x was a
failure, or anything like it. #python has claims that Python 3.x, as
a platform for building production apps, is a work in progress because
of third party library support, and the language itself is pretty much
done and okay -- a cleaner version of 2.x. People ask why it's too
early to use Py3k, and that's _always_ the answer they get: at least
the first half, and usually the second half too.

In the mean while, we encourage people to write code that will be easy
to port and behave well in 3.x: new-style classes, don't use eager
versions when the Py3k default is lazy and you don't actually need the
eager thing, use as many third party libraries as possible (the idea
being that this would minimize effort needed to make the switch on the
grand scale of things), use absolute imports always (and only explicit
relative, but it's discouraged), always have a full unit test suite.
This is advice that generally makes a lot of sense, and it's the
recommended thing in PEP 3000 for porting to 3.x as well.

We're still telling people to use Python 2.x by default because of a
few major things:

1. going out on a limb here: well over 90% of those people are
completely new to Python and out of those most of them completely new
to programming too,
2. the nicest libraries for doing a lot of stuff aren't ported yet, or
are in the process of being ported but not yet recommended for actual
use by their authors, (this seems to be a point of contention?)
3. we know how to help people better with it

Which are all basically different incarnations of the same issue.
People are working on libraries everywhere and I really don't want to
pretend those people haven't gotten any work done, but AFAICT a lot of
these for existing mature projects that you'd want people to use in
order to be happy productive Python users don't really exist yet or
are at best experimental. At the very least I think most people can
agree that 2.x is still the default release for existing, mature
software projects and most new ones too.

I can only speak for my own area of intrest: Python is way too big for
anyone to have used every piece of software for it ever. I,
personally, don't use 3.x because I develop for PyS60 devices,
PythonCE devices (2.5 only), and Twisted servers (2.6), and none of
those work on 3.x yet. The other thing we build is websites, and AFAIK
the web situation, for now, is still use python2.x, too? (for any
non-trivial website, of course). We use AMQP, and the best thing we've
found for it is 2.x only (maybe Carrot and Pika do 3.x now, but I
can't find any evidence of it). Nobody here (here = place of business)
hates Python 3. We just can't use it.

I'm very sorry if you've been offended. Like Glyph said: we're not
grinding ideological axes. We're just recommending what 

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Michael Foord]

On 20 Jun 2010, at 11:35, Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be wrote:


Hello,



I'm one of the active people in #python that some people dislike for
behavior with respect to Python 3.

First of all I'd like to defuse the situation, much like Jacob.
Seriously. It's been a bunch of posts so far and most of them have
been pretty angry. Let's take a deep breath and try to fix the
situation that's getting people frustrated like grownups :-) (FWIW: I
find being called worse than half-intelligent pretty offensive. Let's
stop doing that?)

The idea being expressed in the IRC topic is _way_ bigger than the
room an IRC topic gives you.


Hey Laurens - I don't have an issue with with anything you've said,  
but given the topic is far more nuanced than an IRC topic can express  
maybe that just isn't the right place for it.


Michael




Yes, it's an imperfect medium, yes, it's
probably partially based on the use case: it's just that experience
leads us to believe that the vast majority of use cases ends up being
more in 2.x turf then 3.x turf, at the very least in the past.

I'm sorry if you had the impression people wanted to nail you at the
stake for using Python 3. If that's how you felt, it isn't true. I
basically agree with Glyph. I don't think we've recently (I'm not
omnipresent) told anyone who had any good reasons to to stop using
Python 3. If someone's doing work that actually needs Python 3 (most
recent example a GSOC student porting Sphinx), we try our best to
help, and AFAICT we've mostly been successful. (Please correct me if
you think this is erroneous.). We don't get too many people that
actually want or need that, but I'm guessing that's mostly because
people porting libraries to py3k usually already know what they're
doing so they don't need the first-line-of-defense thing for Python
questions that #python tries to be.

Maybe you disagree on what good reasons are. #python is a bunch of
volunteers giving help, free of charge, which is usually of a pretty
high standard because they're professional Python developers and have
been for a long time. Maybe that biases some of us against Py3k? Fact
remains that there's a bunch of active people on IRC who pour a lot of
time and effort into #python and make a lot of newbies really happy,
and I think the picture you're painting based on a single issue that
clearly not everyone agrees on is a bit disrespectful and somewhat
unfair.

Also, I'm pretty sure nobody has ever said that Python 3.x was a
failure, or anything like it. #python has claims that Python 3.x, as
a platform for building production apps, is a work in progress because
of third party library support, and the language itself is pretty much
done and okay -- a cleaner version of 2.x. People ask why it's too
early to use Py3k, and that's _always_ the answer they get: at least
the first half, and usually the second half too.

In the mean while, we encourage people to write code that will be easy
to port and behave well in 3.x: new-style classes, don't use eager
versions when the Py3k default is lazy and you don't actually need the
eager thing, use as many third party libraries as possible (the idea
being that this would minimize effort needed to make the switch on the
grand scale of things), use absolute imports always (and only explicit
relative, but it's discouraged), always have a full unit test suite.
This is advice that generally makes a lot of sense, and it's the
recommended thing in PEP 3000 for porting to 3.x as well.

We're still telling people to use Python 2.x by default because of a
few major things:

1. going out on a limb here: well over 90% of those people are
completely new to Python and out of those most of them completely new
to programming too,
2. the nicest libraries for doing a lot of stuff aren't ported yet, or
are in the process of being ported but not yet recommended for actual
use by their authors, (this seems to be a point of contention?)
3. we know how to help people better with it

Which are all basically different incarnations of the same issue.
People are working on libraries everywhere and I really don't want to
pretend those people haven't gotten any work done, but AFAICT a lot of
these for existing mature projects that you'd want people to use in
order to be happy productive Python users don't really exist yet or
are at best experimental. At the very least I think most people can
agree that 2.x is still the default release for existing, mature
software projects and most new ones too.

I can only speak for my own area of intrest: Python is way too big for
anyone to have used every piece of software for it ever. I,
personally, don't use 3.x because I develop for PyS60 devices,
PythonCE devices (2.5 only), and Twisted servers (2.6), and none of
those work on 3.x yet. The other thing we build is websites, and AFAIK
the web situation, for now, is still use python2.x, too? (for any
non-trivial website, of course). We use AMQP, and the best thing we've
found for it is 

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Laurens Van Houtven]

Michael,


Fair point! It's mostly put in the topic so people can ask about it
and we can give them more detailed answers, because, as other people
have mentioned, the exact answer depends largely on what *precisely*
someone is doing.

I'm not sure what sort of an effect it would have if we took it out.
Maybe something we could try? I'm not sure it'd have much of a
practical effect since most of the regulars expertise isn't going to
shift instantly, so getting actual help is probably going to be a bit
rough on 3.x users.

At the very least I'm going to take this suggestion to #python's
regulars and see what they have to say about it :-)

(One of the problems people I've talked to in private that were
pretty miffed about is the dissonance between #python and
python-dev, and that there's some problem with people assuming things
said on #python as being very authoritative answers (ha ha). I think
this is really bad for Python as a whole and I've love to hear ideas
on how you guys think it could be fixed.)


thanks
Laurens
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Nick Coghlan]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be wrote:
 I'm not sure what sort of an effect it would have if we took it out.
 Maybe something we could try? I'm not sure it'd have much of a
 practical effect since most of the regulars expertise isn't going to
 shift instantly, so getting actual help is probably going to be a bit
 rough on 3.x users.

Given the number of other links that are already in the status
message, it would be really nice if the comment could be updated to
something like:

Is Python3 ready for me? http://python-commandments.org/python3.html;

i.e. make it clear that this is a question where the answer will vary
based on your use case, and provide a clear direction on where to get
more information.

That page could then be updated to give a more balance view of the
pros of Python 3 (e.g. cleaner core language design, future direction
of the language, much better Unicode support) and the pros of Python 2
(e.g. wider installed base, better current third party library
support, greater existing developer base, larger support ecosystem,
greater #python expertise)

 (One of the problems people I've talked to in private that were
 pretty miffed about is the dissonance between #python and
 python-dev, and that there's some problem with people assuming things
 said on #python as being very authoritative answers (ha ha). I think
 this is really bad for Python as a whole and I've love to hear ideas
 on how you guys think it could be fixed.)

There are always going to be differences in how different communities
see the world and even the Python community is far too large to have
a consistent point of view on almost any topic. So we'll likely have
to muddle through with various ideas slowly percolating through to
different parts of the community. That said, keeping in touch with the
#python crew is certainly something we haven't paid much attention to
in the past, but is probably just as important as staying in touch
with major library developers and the developers of other
implementations.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Antoine Pitrou]

On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:33:35 +0200
Laurens Van Houtven l...@laurensvh.be wrote:
 
 (One of the problems people I've talked to in private that were
 pretty miffed about is the dissonance between #python and
 python-dev, and that there's some problem with people assuming things
 said on #python as being very authoritative answers (ha ha). I think
 this is really bad for Python as a whole and I've love to hear ideas
 on how you guys think it could be fixed.)

Perhaps lower the tone a bit on http://pound-python.org/ ?
“foremost support system for developing quality Python
applications” ... “crack team of Python experts” ... “Your time won't
be wasted by architecture astronauts or trivial repetitions of the
docs”.

(I understand these are slightly tongue-in-cheek but, if this page is
intented mainly for beginners, I think being descriptive is more
valuable)

Also, mention other support options there - primarily comp.lang.python,
of course, and the official documentation pages.

Regards

Antoine.


___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Nick Efford]

I'm sorry if you had the impression people wanted to nail you at the
stake for using Python 3. If that's how you felt, it isn't true. I
basically agree with Glyph. I don't think we've recently (I'm not
omnipresent) told anyone who had any good reasons to to stop using
Python 3. If someone's doing work that actually needs Python 3 (most
recent example a GSOC student porting Sphinx), we try our best to
help, and AFAICT we've mostly been successful. (Please correct me if
you think this is erroneous.). We don't get too many people that
actually want or need that, but I'm guessing that's mostly because
people porting libraries to py3k usually already know what they're
doing so they don't need the first-line-of-defense thing for Python
questions that #python tries to be.


Thanks for explaining your position on this so carefully,
Laurens.  You've made many reasonable points which I hope will
help to cool things down a little.

Clearly, there are situations where it makes sense to advocate
Python 2.X and other situations where people can be encouraged to
consider Python 3.  The issues that potential users need to
consider are too subtle to be represented fairly by the simple
advice to 'avoid Python 3', so can we not all agree to remove
it as a #python topic as a gesture of goodwill?  Nobody need
change their opinions or adovacy as a result, but it would have
the benefit of presenting #python in a more neutral and inclusive
light.

I've not used IRC much in the past, but if it would be useful for
someone like myself - a longtime Python user but recent and
enthusiastic Python 3 adopter - to offer my opinions and advice
on the issue to newcomers then I'm certainly willing to get
involved.


We're still telling people to use Python 2.x by default because of a
few major things:

1. going out on a limb here: well over 90% of those people are
completely new to Python and out of those most of them completely new
to programming too,


Not sure if I agree with you here; I regard people new to
programming as the prime candidates for using Python 3.  Many of
the language changes have the effect of making it significantly
easier to learn for newcomers (I wrote about this a while ago -
see http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/papers/teachpy3.html).
Also, people new to Python or programming in general won't have
the burden of legacy code that needs to be converted.

The only situation in which I'd direct someone new to programming
away from Python 3 would be if they had a specific need to use a
library that wasn't yet supported.


2. the nicest libraries for doing a lot of stuff aren't ported yet, or
are in the process of being ported but not yet recommended for actual
use by their authors, (this seems to be a point of contention?)


This has certainly been the key issue for me.  Only in the past
two or three months have we got to the point where I feel can commit
to Python 3 fully.  Six months ago, I definitely could not have
done so.  This is progress, and we need to be positive about it.

Regards,


Nick

--
Dr Nick Efford, School of | E: n.d.eff...@leeds.ac.uk
Computing, University of  | T: +44 113 343 6809
Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK | W: http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nde/
--+-
PGP fingerprint: 6ADF 16C2 4E2D 320B F537  8F3C 402D 1C78 A668 8492
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Terry Reedy]

After reading the discussion in the previous thread, signed in to 
#python and verified that the intro message starts with a lie about 
python3. I also verified that the official #python site links to Python 
Commandment Don't use Python 3… yet. The excuse that the negative 
commandment site is not part of the official site is does not wash. The 
#python site maintainer choose that as the authoritative word on the 
topic On using Python 2.x or Python 3.x.


Since a fair, half-intelligent person would know that the usability of 
Python3 depends on the user, this all strikes as conscious sabotage.


To me, this, along with other reports, is really ugly. I do not wish to 
fight such people; but I would rather ask python3 questions in a pro- 
rather than anti-python3 atmosphere. #python is certainly not a place 
that I would refer new people to.


Given that the 'owners' of #python have been asked and refuse to remove 
their negative-opinion-stated-as-leading-headline-fact, it seems to me 
that we need a separate #python3 channel. The topic could be Welcome to 
discussion of Python3, the latest, greated version of Python. The first 
link might be to the current stable Python3 docs. Hence the '!' in the 
subject line.


HoweverI have very little experience with IRC and consequently have 
little idea what getting a permanent, owned, channel like #python 
entails. Hence the '?' that follows.


What do others think?





___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Glyph Lefkowitz]

On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:

 HoweverI have very little experience with IRC and consequently have little 
 idea what getting a permanent, owned, channel like #python entails. Hence the 
 '?' that follows.
 
 What do others think?

Sure, this is a good idea.

Technically speaking, this is extremely easy.  Somebody needs to /msg chanserv 
register #python3 and that's about it.  (In this case, that someone may need 
to be Brett Cannon, since he is the official group contact for Freenode 
regarding Python-related channels.)

Practically speaking, you will need a group of at least a dozen contributors, 
each in a different timezone, who sit there all day answering questions :).  
Otherwise the ownership of the channel is just a signpost pointing at an empty 
room.

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[geremy condra]

On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
 After reading the discussion in the previous thread, signed in to #python
 and verified that the intro message starts with a lie about python3. I also
 verified that the official #python site links to Python Commandment Don't
 use Python 3… yet. The excuse that the negative commandment site is not
 part of the official site is does not wash. The #python site maintainer
 choose that as the authoritative word on the topic On using Python 2.x or
 Python 3.x.

 Since a fair, half-intelligent person would know that the usability of
 Python3 depends on the user, this all strikes as conscious sabotage.

 To me, this, along with other reports, is really ugly. I do not wish to
 fight such people; but I would rather ask python3 questions in a pro- rather
 than anti-python3 atmosphere. #python is certainly not a place that I would
 refer new people to.

 Given that the 'owners' of #python have been asked and refuse to remove
 their negative-opinion-stated-as-leading-headline-fact, it seems to me that
 we need a separate #python3 channel. The topic could be Welcome to
 discussion of Python3, the latest, greated version of Python. The first
 link might be to the current stable Python3 docs. Hence the '!' in the
 subject line.

 HoweverI have very little experience with IRC and consequently have little
 idea what getting a permanent, owned, channel like #python entails. Hence
 the '?' that follows.

 What do others think?

Seems like it turns a disagreement into a power struggle that python-dev
is unlikely to win. If people here were interested in the irc, the irc culture
would never have become as disconnected from the core group as it has,
and even the most impassioned call isn't going to build an active
community overnight. Furthermore, if #python has 200 people in it and
#python3 is a ghost town, they can just tell anybody asking a python3
question to go to #python3 and snicker, reinforcing the widely held belief
that python3 itself is a failure. It also runs the risk of hardening their
existing position, and in any event begins the process of fracturing the
community at a point where 3.x is probably not going to come out on top.

Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of #python, but
practically I see very little that can be done to rectify the situation at this
point.

Geremy Condra
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Glyph Lefkowitz]

On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:39 PM, geremy condra wrote:

 Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of #python, but
 practically I see very little that can be done to rectify the situation at 
 this
 point.

Here's something you can do: port libraries to python 3 and make the ecosystem 
viable.

It's as simple as that.  Nobody on #python has an ideological axe to grind, 
they just want to tell users to use tools which actually solve their problems.  
(Well, unless you think that helping users is ideological axe-grinding, in 
which case I think you may want to re-examine your own premises.)

If Python 3 had all the features and libraries as Python 2, and ran in all the 
same places (for example, as Stephen Thorne reminded me when I asked him about 
this, the oldest supported version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux...) then it 
would be an equally viable answer on IRC.  It's going to take a lot of work to 
get it to that point.

Even if you write code, of course, it's too much work for one person to fill 
the whole gap.  Have some patience.  The PSF is funding these efforts, and more 
library authors are porting all the time.  Eventually, resistance in forums 
like Freenode's #python will disappear.  But you can't make it go away by 
wishing it away, you have to get rid of the cause.

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Raymond Hettinger]

On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:39 PM, geremy condra wrote:
 Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of #python,

This is so profoundly wrong on so many levels it is hard to know how to respond.


Raymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Jacob Kaplan-Moss]

On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Raymond Hettinger
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This is so profoundly wrong on so many levels it is hard to know how to 
 respond.

C'mon, Raymond, that's not any more helpful.

Geremy wasn't trying to argue for that course of action; he was
expression his frustration with the culture that's developed in
#python. There's nothing wrong with frustration, and there's nothing
wrong with expressing those -- or any -- feelings. Indeed, I'm happy
that folks are blowing off a bit of steam here instead of doing
something silly in public.

Let's all try to simmer down here a little bit and cut each other some
slack: this is a frustration situation, and we're not going to help it
by heaping more fuel on the fire.

Jacob
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[Nick Coghlan]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss ja...@jacobian.org wrote:
 Let's all try to simmer down here a little bit and cut each other some
 slack: this is a frustration situation, and we're not going to help it
 by heaping more fuel on the fire.

The other thing to keep in mind is that there was a time when what the
#python folks are still saying *wasn't wrong*. Yes, their advice is
too negative for the situation as it stands now. But go back 12 or 18
months and their description would have been far more apt.

It sounds like they're happy to update the relevant pages to provide a
more balanced perspective now, and that's the important point.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] #Python3 ! ? (was Python Library Support in 3.x)

[geremy condra]

On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Raymond Hettinger
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:39 PM, geremy condra wrote:
 Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of #python,

 This is so profoundly wrong on so many levels it is hard to know how to 
 respond.

Alright, so, yeah- I said it in the heat of the moment and shouldn't
have. I apologize.
I just hate having to explain to folks that don't know any better that
#python doesn't
represent the opinions of the people who actually develop python, and
I'm going to
STFU before I get sucked into this again.

Geremy Condra
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com