Chromium already uses the installed python for Mac/Linux, which defaults to
2.5. So it sounds like we can safely use 2.5.
Ojan
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Marc-Antoine Ruel wrote:
> FYI, Chromium folks on Windows will be on python 2.6 real soon(tm).
> The CL to bug them to upgrade should b
FYI, Chromium folks on Windows will be on python 2.6 real soon(tm).
The CL to bug them to upgrade should be committed within the next few
minutes.
[Thread hijack]
If you're not a Chromium-Webkit committer running on Windows, please
ignore the rest of this email.
Otherwise, please "del depot_tool
Awesome!
/me goes and comments on the bug.
Adam
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Chris Jerdonek wrote:
> Mechanize (and ClientForm on which it depends) does work with Python 2.4:
>
> http://wwwsearch.sourceforge.net/mechanize/
>
> (See the section on compatibility.)
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010
Mechanize (and ClientForm on which it depends) does work with Python 2.4:
http://wwwsearch.sourceforge.net/mechanize/
(See the section on compatibility.)
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
> My understanding is that some of the libraries we use, like Mechanize,
> don't work in
My understanding is that some of the libraries we use, like Mechanize,
don't work in Python 2.4. My complaint in Bug 36063 is that we're
re-implementing Mechanize poorly. I'd rather we just upgraded the
machines that need to run-webkit-tests to a more modern version of
Python.
Adam
On Fri, Mar
No one responded back with a summary of the Python 2.4 discussion, so
I'll attempt a summary of my own after reading--
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35584
(If you recall, we are trying to decide what Python code we write
needs to work with Python 2.4.)
The Chromium project still uses P
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Mar 7, 2010, at 3:18 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:43 PM, David Kilzer wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, March 4, 2010 at 5:35:08 PM, William Siegrist wrote:
>>>
Since I have a Tiger machine handy, I tested this a
On Mar 7, 2010, at 3:18 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:43 PM, David Kilzer
wrote:
On Thu, March 4, 2010 at 5:35:08 PM, William Siegrist wrote:
Since I have a Tiger machine handy, I tested this and was able to
build python
2.5.5 from MacPorts on a PowerPC. It takes a wh
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:43 PM, David Kilzer wrote:
> On Thu, March 4, 2010 at 5:35:08 PM, William Siegrist wrote:
>
>> Since I have a Tiger machine handy, I tested this and was able to build
>> python
>> 2.5.5 from MacPorts on a PowerPC. It takes a while, but it worked. I did not
>> try
>> pyth
On Thu, March 4, 2010 at 5:35:08 PM, William Siegrist wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote:
>
> > [Resending from correct address.]
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> >
> >> 4) If we have a smooth way to do it, then locally installing a newe
On Mar 4, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
>
> 04.03.2010, в 17:35, William Siegrist написал(а):
>
>> Since I have a Tiger machine handy, I tested this and was able to build
>> python 2.5.5 from MacPorts on a PowerPC. It takes a while, but it worked. I
>> did not try python 2.6.
>
04.03.2010, в 17:35, William Siegrist написал(а):
> Since I have a Tiger machine handy, I tested this and was able to build
> python 2.5.5 from MacPorts on a PowerPC. It takes a while, but it worked. I
> did not try python 2.6.
Did it bring many dependencies with it? I've heard enough horror
On Mar 4, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote:
> [Resending from correct address.]
>
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>> 4) If we have a smooth way to do it, then locally installing a newer Python
>> as part of the WebKit development process might be acceptable as
[Resending from correct address.]
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 4) If we have a smooth way to do it, then locally installing a newer Python
> as part of the WebKit development process might be acceptable as a part of
> the WebKit. After all, everyone developing on Wi
On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Maciej Stachowiak
wrote:
On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
I think we should ignore Tiger for the purposes of this discussion.
We (Apple) still need to do development on Tiger. We would strong
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
>
>> I think we should ignore Tiger for the purposes of this discussion.
>
> We (Apple) still need to do development on Tiger. We would strongly prefer
> that WebKit's tools work on Tiger.
On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
I think we should ignore Tiger for the purposes of this discussion.
We (Apple) still need to do development on Tiger. We would strongly
prefer that WebKit's tools work on Tiger.
Regards,
Maciej
__
In case this was missed on the bug, Chromium Win uses 2.4, so, yes. At
least until we upgrade to 2.5, and there's no ETA or plan for that at
this time.
-- Dirk
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
> I think we should ignore Tiger for the purposes of this discussion.
>
> Back to th
I think we should ignore Tiger for the purposes of this discussion.
Back to the original question: does anyone have reasons to need 2.4?
-eric
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:44 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> There difference between Python 2.3 and 2.5 is pretty large. What was added
> was not esoteric.
There difference between Python 2.3 and 2.5 is pretty large. What was added
was not esoteric. Take a look at http://docs.python.org/whatsnew/2.4.html
and http://docs.python.org/whatsnew/2.5.html Included in there is stuff
like try/catch/finally.
I totally agree that basic tools (like build-web
I am not sure why we would make a distinction between development tools and
and supported platforms. Any scripts checked in need to run on Tiger. If we
need to fix a Tiger bug, we boot up Tiger and develop there.
-Sam
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM, David Levin wrote:
> I think it depends on th
I think it depends on the tool.
Since tiger is still supported by webkit (it is in the buildbot), then any
script that run during the build or running layout tests would need to run
on python 2.3.5. (The version that shipped with Tiger.)
Some development still happens on Leopard (I think), so it
Recently, there has been some off-list discussion about the minimum
Python version WebKit should support (i.e. for the Python scripts in
WebKitTools/Scripts).
Up to this point, we haven't been explicit about it. This ambiguity
has occasionally caused things to break for people using versions
befo
23 matches
Mail list logo
