Re: Future of python2.6 in Debian
Hi, On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 06:43:23PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Jan 04, 2012, at 01:58 PM, Luca Falavigna wrote: > >After switching python-defaults to python2.7, I'm not sure we discussed > >whether to keep python2.6 for Wheezy or not. In theory, we should be able to > >get rid of python2.6 in time for the release (I'd likely be able to act as a > >driver for the task, as I did for python2.4 and python2.5 tear-down). > > > >What do you think? > > +1. Time to retire Python 2.6. From Bernd's reply it sounds like the Zope > upgrade needn't block this. please DON'T! I am a heavy Zope user, and, as others stated already, the Debian packages for Zope are useless. Sorry to say it that way, but that's what it is. This has nothing to do with the way the Zope packagers in Debian work, just with a gross mismatch of release cycles. BUT: Having a decent Python2.6 plus assorted packages makes it SO MUCH EASIER to run Zope on top of Debian, and it actually sets itself apart from the other platforms with the ease and safety with which you can do this, currently making Debian one of the, or *the*, most preferrable platform to deploy Zope. Also, while the latest version of Plone, probably the most prominent user of Zope, is said to be compatible with Python2.7, it's still in beta, and migrating a Plone site from one version of Plone to the next is all but an easy task if you have any non-standard products in your site (basically, all of us have). Think Firefox and its add-ons, if you have no other comparison. For that reason, many Plone users run older versions of Zope, thus requiring older versions of Python as well. Kicking Python2.6 out of Debian would mean that not only the Zope stuff, but also the Python core would need to be installed from source code as well, which makes at least me feel much less comfortable, as I eg. trust Debian security much more than I trust upstream to not just ignore Python2.6, thus creating (hard to meet) pressure to move to Python2.7. The problem is imho exacerbated by the fact that there is currently no backport of Python2.7 for Squeeze. I don't know how hard it is to keep Python2.6, but I clearly see a benefit for users. So far, my vote goes overwhelmingly to keeping Python2.6 in Debian for Wheezy (at least). Kind regards, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120529092137.ga6...@spruce.wiehl.oeko.net
Re: Future of python2.6 in Debian
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:21:37AM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote: > > >After switching python-defaults to python2.7, I'm not sure we discussed > > >whether to keep python2.6 for Wheezy or not. In theory, we should be able > > >to > > >get rid of python2.6 in time for the release (I'd likely be able to act as > > >a > > >driver for the task, as I did for python2.4 and python2.5 tear-down). > > > > > >What do you think? > > > > +1. Time to retire Python 2.6. From Bernd's reply it sounds like the Zope > > upgrade needn't block this. > > please DON'T! > > I am a heavy Zope user, and, as others stated already, the Debian > packages for Zope are useless. Sorry to say it that way, but that's what > it is. This has nothing to do with the way the Zope packagers in Debian > work, just with a gross mismatch of release cycles. > > BUT: > > Having a decent Python2.6 plus assorted packages makes it SO MUCH EASIER > to run Zope on top of Debian, and it actually sets itself apart from the > other platforms with the ease and safety with which you can do this, > currently making Debian one of the, or *the*, most preferrable platform > to deploy Zope. You can make and then support a private repo with python2.6 based on the last Debian release. > Kicking Python2.6 out of Debian would mean that not only the Zope stuff, > but also the Python core would need to be installed from source code as > well, which makes at least me feel much less comfortable, as I eg. trust > Debian security much more than I trust upstream to not just ignore > Python2.6, thus creating (hard to meet) pressure to move to Python2.7. If you expect official Debian support (including security), that means more work for respective people. The usual question: are you ready to do at least part of that work? -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Future of python2.6 in Debian
Hi, On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 05:28:08PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > You can make and then support a private repo with python2.6 based on the > last Debian release. yes, I can. :/ I actually did something like this to get 2.6 in Lenny. > If you expect official Debian support (including security), that means > more work for respective people. The usual question: are you ready to do > at least part of that work? I'm not "expecting" that much, and I don't really feel qualified to do much in this direction, with all the usual other problems applying, too, but if someone says "I lead, you follow", that might be a good-enough plan. Something like getting some supervision - eg. I don't feel anywhere near qualified to find, much less fix, a security problem in Python myself. I only voiced my opinion and stated a reasoning that hasn't been mentioned. It's of course up to the do-ers to do anything with it, or to ignore it. Kind regards, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120529125818.gb6...@spruce.wiehl.oeko.net
Re: Assertions that are always true
On May 28, 2012, at 12:33 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote: >It's a mistake to write > > assert(tilsit, 'Never at the end of the week, sir.') > >instead of > > assert tilsit, 'Never at the end of the week, sir.' > >The former assertion is always true, and thus no-op. Python >= 2.6 emits a >SyntaxWarning about this. Nice catch. I've seen something similar quite often, but written correctly, it's a good way to provide meaningful longer assertion messages, without any ugly backslashes. The *right* way to write this would be: assert tilsit, ( 'Never at the end of the week, sir.') Cheers, -Barry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120529112953.79e71...@resist.wooz.org
