On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Zachary Gramana <zgram...@pottsconsultinggroup.com> wrote: > There are some big Python applications (e.g. Mercurial) that are going to > remain on 2.7 for some time. There are important modules that are still > missing (bz2), or are incomplete (_winreg), that create compatibility > barriers. It would also be nice to have sockets moved to the > socket.py/_socket.cs model (similar to how ssl has been implemented) to > support apps that monkey patch that module.
100% agreed. I don't want to see 2.7 whither, for exactly the reasons you mention, and there is still a lot of low hanging fruit that could make it much better. The thing is, my own interests are drifting to Python 3, because I think it will allow IronPython to be as close to perfectly compatible as possible. Plus, it will give me a chance to really get into the guts of IronPython, which I'm going to document more fully as I go. > > I know the community is limited in resources, but I would hope that 2.7 not > be abandoned too quickly. I would happily volunteer to own the maintenance > of 2.7, but I am far too early in the learning curve to be of any practical > use. That said, I'm happy to help on items where I am familiar with that > part of the codebase, or where an experienced contributor can give me some > mentoring. For example, I'm interested in helping to implement the bz2 > module using ic#code's #zip lib > (http://www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SharpZipLib/), but would definitely > need some mentoring along the way. I will do (almost) whatever I need to to get more people involved in this project. Unimplemented or incomplete modules are a great place to start (that's how I started). Any assistance (no matter how small) is appreciated. - Jeff _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
