FYI, the latest revision of the v21 branch is now compatible with Python 3.
There are certainly a few bugs left, but nothing critical AFAIK: it's
quite stable.

Happy new year!
-Pierre

2012/12/31 Carlos Córdoba <[email protected]>:
> Yes, please make a 2.2 branch and leave the default repo for 2.3. This way
> we could push 2.2 for the next Ubuntu release and leave 2.3 for 13.10. Sadly
> we are six months behind our roadmap but the only development left for me is
> fixing the editor bugs I introduced when we branched 2.2, i.e. colon
> autoinsertion and quotes autocompletion.
>
> As a matter of fact, we could even tag 2.2beta1 right now, and I'll try to
> make a final release by the end of the month.
>
> Cheers,
> Carlos
>
>
> 2012/12/29 Pierre Raybaut <[email protected]>
>>
>> Le 28 déc. 2012 à 17:51, Jed Ludlow <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>
>>
>>> I've just been able to run the application without an (immediate)
>>> error:
>>> http://spyderlib.googlecode.com/files/spyder_python3-1.png
>>>
>>> It's quite encouraging but I think there are a lot of remaining
>>> issues.
>>> I won't push too far on the v21 branch but it's very useful to proceed
>>> like this: I will use the recent changelog of this branch as a
>>> checklist to migrate the default Hg branch.
>>>
>>
>> From a logistical perspective, are you thinking of a 2.2 release prior to
>> the Python 3 migration?
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure. It depends on how easy the Python 3 migration will be. So
>> far, I've migrated four other Python packages (formlayout, guidata, guiqwt
>> and winpython) to Python 3 and it has been pretty easy, without any
>> (detectable) collateral damage regarding Python 2 compatibility.
>>
>> I knew from the start that Spyder was the hardest of all to migrate to
>> Python 3, that's why I chose to begin with the other packages.
>>
>> Now that I've done a few experiments on Spyder v2.1 to make it compatible
>> with Python 3, I think it's doable but is it the wisest thing to do? If we
>> are so close to v2.2 release (we're already six month late if I remember
>> correctly the initial roadmap), let's release it. It does not prevent us
>> from releasing v2.3 just a few weeks after -- v2.3 would be a version that
>> "only" adds Python 3 support. I'm fine with that strategy.
>>
>> So let's make a named branch called "2.2"!
>>
>> Regarding my personal schedule, now is the time for working on Spyder
>> Python 3 migration issues because solving them properly requires more time
>> than an average contribution to the project. So I think that I'll keep
>> digging on v2.1 migration issues and continue to take notes on how I solved
>> them. A lot of these fixes will be reusable as is for the future 2.3 branch.
>>
>> So far, as I wrote earlier, I've been able to execute Spyder v2.1 with
>> Python 3.3 without any runtime error but some features are still broken. I
>> had to let my laptop behind so I'm frustrated because the last bug I saw was
>> a hard one apparently and I couldn't figure out where it came from:
>> communication between Spyder's GUI process and the remote Python interpreter
>> process is not working (so the Variable Explorer is broken and so on) - if
>> anyone has a suggestion... Code introspection and analysis feature are
>> broken too (although pyflakes and rope were detected). And probably a lot
>> more bugs that I didn't have the time to see...
>>
>> If so, it may make sense to either clone the default repository to a v22
>> or create a named v22 branch inside of the default repo before the Python 3
>> migration work. I guess I'm wondering how much destabilization you expect
>> from the Python 3 migration.
>>
>> Either way, I would agree with your earlier suggestion that we finish the
>> integration of any major outstanding work before committing any Python 3
>> compatibility changes to the default repo. I've queued up a few for review.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "spyder" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "spyder" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "spyder" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"spyder" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.

Reply via email to