On 3/29/2015 6:03 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Those questions seem unfair to me. Nagle posted an experience report
> about a real-world project to migrate a Python 2 codebase to Python 3.
> He reported hitting more snags than some of us might expect purely from
> the Python 3 propaganda ("oh, just run the 2to3 utility and it does
> everything for you"). The report presented info worth considering for
> anyone thinking of doing a 2-to-3 migration of their own, or maybe even
> choosing between 2 and 3 for a new project. I find reports like that to
> be valuable whether or not they suggest fixes for the snags.
Thanks.
Meanwhile, I've found two more variants on "flup"
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/flipflop
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/flup6
All of these are descended from the original "flup" code base.
PyPi also has
fcgi-python (Python 2.6, Windows only.)
fcgiapp (circa 2005)
superfcgi (circa 2009)
Those can probably be ignored.
One of the "flup" variants may do the job, but since there
are so many, and no single version has won out, testing is
necessary. "flipflop" looks promising, simply because the
author took all the code out that you don't need on a server.
CPAN, the Perl module archive, has some curation and testing.
PyPi lacks that, which is how we end up with situations like
this, where there are 11 ways to do something, most of which
don't work.
Incidentally, in my last report, I reported problems with BS4,
PyMySQL, and Pickle. I now have workarounds for all of those,
but not fixes. The bug reports I listed last time contain the
workaround code.
John Nagle
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
