On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 11:30 AM Julian Foad wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote:
> > Regarding the 1.14 release notes and linking to the Python 3 work
> > in progress / status wiki page, I'm thinking of something along these
> > lines: [...]
>
> Looks good to me. I encourage you to go ahead and commit
Nathan Hartman wrote:
Regarding the 1.14 release notes and linking to the Python 3 work
in progress / status wiki page, I'm thinking of something along these
lines: [...]
Looks good to me. I encourage you to go ahead and commit stuff like
this without waiting for pre-commmit review.
- Julia
On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:14 PM Nathan Hartman wrote:
> I'm placing a reminder to myself to update the 1.14 Release Notes with
> a link to this wiki page in "known issues" as discussed previously...
Regarding the 1.14 release notes and linking to the Python 3 work
in progress / status wiki page, I
On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 6:32 PM Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote on Sun, Dec 01, 2019 at 10:58:34 -0500:
> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 4:05 PM Daniel Shahaf
> > wrote:
> > > Y'all might consider starting a wiki page or a jira issue tracking
> > > the categorization. I think it might be
Nathan Hartman wrote on Sun, Dec 01, 2019 at 10:58:34 -0500:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 4:05 PM Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > I suggest to also grep for «sys.executable»; there are several
> > instances of that in trunk.
>
> I did such a search and sys.executable is found in:
>
> ./build/run_tests.py
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 4:05 PM Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote on Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 20:36:25 +0900:
> > And there seems to be also some scripts calling Python
> > interpreter with -c option.
> >
> > I roughly searched:
> > [[[
> > $ find . -name .svn -prune -or -type f -print0
Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote on Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 20:36:25 +0900:
> And there seems to be also some scripts calling Python
> interpreter with -c option.
>
> I roughly searched:
> [[[
> $ find . -name .svn -prune -or -type f -print0 | xargs -0 egrep -i
> '(^|[^-])python.* -c'
I suggest to also gre
On 28.11.2019 02:54, Nathan Hartman wrote:
> contrib/client-side/svnmerge/svnmerge-migrate-history.py
> contrib/client-side/svnmerge/svnmerge_test.py
> contrib/client-side/svnmerge/svnmerge.py
> contrib/client-side/svnmerge/svnmerge-migrate-history-remotely.py
I think we should move 'svnmerge' t
On 2019/11/28 10:54, Nathan Hartman wrote:
FYI I have made a list of all our Python scripts, categorized in a
very *preliminary* manner into one of three categories:
* Python 3 supported
* Python 3 not supported yet
* Not checked yet
It is preliminary because I've based my categorization on rece
On 28.11.2019 02:54, Nathan Hartman wrote:
> Not Checked For Python 3 Yet
>
[...]
> gen-make.py
This undoubtedly works with Python 3 because it's part of the
non-tarball build (it's used by autogen.sh).
> subversion/bindings/ctypes-python/test/localrepos.py
> subve
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 12:38 AM Yasuhito FUTATSUKI
wrote:
> Perhaps it is necessary to check all Python scripts except those we
> use on build and release which are already checked.
>
> At least I found those in tools/server-side couldn't work on Python 3:
>
> tools/server-side/fsfs-reshared.py
>
On 2019/11/12 12:13, Nathan Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 3:13 AM Julian Foad wrote:
Nathan Hartman wrote:
Question: Some Python scripts have not been updated for Python 3.x
yet. Should those be listed in the release notes under "Known Issues"?
Should a bug be filed? Or both?
Both
Nathan Hartman wrote:
To see all of the above, visit:
https://subversion-staging.apache.org/docs/release-notes/1.14.html
All thoughts, suggestions, and improvements are welcome.
LGTM. I made some small tweaks in http://svn.apache.org/r1869849 .
- Julian
In particular there is a TODO item t
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:06 AM Nathan Hartman
wrote:
> > If the following looks like a reasonable start, I'd like to go ahead
> and commit it (and continue editing/fixing/improving)...
r1869776: I committed most of the text discussed earlier to **staging**.
More below:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 a
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 6:59 AM Julian Foad wrote:
> A thought about supporting older Python versions... Somewhere in the
> pipeline between community inputs and project outputs, should we
> distinguish between "we will not support ..." and "we will be glad to
> accept contributions that enable su
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Tue, 12 Nov 2019 11:45 +00:00:
> Nathan Hartman wrote on Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 22:13:54 -0500:
> > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 3:13 AM Julian Foad wrote:
> > > svn 1.9 Py 2.7 supported, Py 3.x not working
> > > svn 1.10 Py 2.7 supported, Py 3.x+ supported for build & test, not
Julian Foad wrote on Tue, 12 Nov 2019 11:59 +00:00:
> A thought about supporting older Python versions... Somewhere in the
> pipeline between community inputs and project outputs, should we
> distinguish between "we will not support ..." and "we will be glad to
> accept contributions that enable
A thought about supporting older Python versions... Somewhere in the
pipeline between community inputs and project outputs, should we
distinguish between "we will not support ..." and "we will be glad to
accept contributions that enable supporting ..."? How would this look?
I am just getting t
Nathan Hartman wrote on Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 22:13:54 -0500:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 3:13 AM Julian Foad wrote:
>
> > Nathan Hartman wrote:
> > > Question: Some Python scripts have not been updated for Python 3.x
> > > yet. Should those be listed in the release notes under "Known Issues"?
> > >
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 3:13 AM Julian Foad wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote:
> > Question: Some Python scripts have not been updated for Python 3.x
> > yet. Should those be listed in the release notes under "Known Issues"?
> > Should a bug be filed? Or both?
>
> Both: an Issue tracking which ones ar
Nathan Hartman wrote on Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:39:46 -0500:
> Since you wrote "Any other opinions?" I assume you intended to send
> this to the list... (My reply follows below.)
Yes, that's correct. I'd intended to reply offlist but changed my mind partway
through drafting and neglected to chang
Julian Foad wrote on Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 08:13:20 +:
> If I did my search correctly, there is nothing about Python 3 in any of the
> 1.10 through 1.14 release notes. Haven't we got something to say about
> limited support (for build and test?) in some version before 1.14? All I
> could find
Nathan Hartman wrote:
Question: Some Python scripts have not been updated for Python 3.x
yet. Should those be listed in the release notes under "Known Issues"?
Should a bug be filed? Or both?
Both: an Issue tracking which ones are known broken or untested, and a
pointer to it in the release no
Since you wrote "Any other opinions?" I assume you intended to send
this to the list... (My reply follows below.)
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 5:31 AM Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 10:59:32 -0500:
> > Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm guessing that for downstream's
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:30 AM Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, 05 Nov 2019 04:48 +00:00:
> > Subversion 1.14 continues to support Python 2.7 to ease the transition
> > to Python 3 for those who have not yet made the jump. As Subversion
> > 1.14 is a Long Term Support (LTS) rel
Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, 05 Nov 2019 04:48 +00:00:
> Support for Python 3.x:
>
> Python 3.x and newer are now supported by Subversion's swig-py bindings
> and automated test suite. Python 2.7 is still supported.
>
> Support for Python 2.7 to be phased out:
>
> As of 1 January 2020, Python 2
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 6:50 AM Julian Foad wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
> > I'll put up a skeleton 1.14 release notes file today, ready for someone
> > to fill in a section about Py3.
>
> r1869363.
>
> Who can write a note in there about the changes?
I'm guessing something along these lines... b
Julian Foad wrote:
I'll put up a skeleton 1.14 release notes file today, ready for someone
to fill in a section about Py3.
r1869363.
Who can write a note in there about the changes?
- Julian
Branko Čibej wrote:
Merged to trunk in r1869354.
Thanks!
I'll let someone else handle the release notes. :)
I'll put up a skeleton 1.14 release notes file today, ready for someone
to fill in a section about Py3.
- Julian
On 04.11.2019 05:52, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 21:39:23 +0200:
>> 1. we release 1.13.0 as planned next week when the soak period ends
>> (pending any last-minute critical bugs found, of course);
>>
>> 2. immediately after the 1.13.0 release, we merge th
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 21:39:23 +0200:
> 1. we release 1.13.0 as planned next week when the soak period ends
> (pending any last-minute critical bugs found, of course);
>
> 2. immediately after the 1.13.0 release, we merge the swig-py3 branch
> to trunk; and,
Anyone
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, 22 Oct 2019 19:39 +00:00:
1. we release 1.13.0 as planned next week when the soak period ends
(pending any last-minute critical bugs found, of course);
Speaking of which, do we have time to get the changes currently in
STATUS into .0, or w
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, 22 Oct 2019 19:39 +00:00:
> 1. we release 1.13.0 as planned next week when the soak period ends
> (pending any last-minute critical bugs found, of course);
Speaking of which, do we have time to get the changes currently in
STATUS into .0, or will they need to wait f
Julian Foad wrote on Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:23 +00:00:
> Branko Čibej wrote:
> > $ svn info --show-item=relative-url
> > ^/subversion/branches/swig-py3
> > $ svn log --stop-on-copy | egrep '^r\d+ \|' | cut -d '|' -f 2 | sort -u
> > cmpilato
> > danielsh
> > futatuki
> > luke1410
> > troycurt
Hi everyone,
The support for Swig bindings for Python 3 (on branches/swig-py3) seems
to be complete. Or at least complete enough that any changes that might
still be needed can be done on trunk. I /think/ that includes
documenting the required Swig version (>= 3.0.9, < 4.0, IIUC).
In light of the
35 matches
Mail list logo
