Ignore this. I am unable to reproduce it for now.
=
On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 2:36:50 PM UTC+5:30, Sundar wrote:
>
> When I try to run the above version under Apache (2.4), welcome app screen
> comes. When I click on 'Admin' button, an error message is displayed.
Be good if there could be a new release with this fixed fairly soon as many
people seem to be getting going with py3 now and the traceback and cvs imports
seem to be the main issues.
Donald
--
Resources:
- http://web2py.com
- http://web2py.com/book (Documentation)
- http://github.com/web2py/w
Looks like if you use the latest git version then the error tickets work as
expected.
On Friday, February 15, 2019 at 10:04:50 AM UTC-6, Kevin Keller wrote:
>
> Is there any update to this?
>
> On Friday, 1 February 2019 17:21:40 UTC+1, Brian M wrote:
>>
>> So I'm trying to finally move my web2p
Is there any update to this?
On Friday, 1 February 2019 17:21:40 UTC+1, Brian M wrote:
>
> So I'm trying to finally move my web2py apps over to Python 3.7 before
> Python 2.7 reaches EOL and, while for the most part they're working fine, I
> am finding that when there is a problem the web2py Err
I also wonder if someone is looking into this
On Friday, 15 February 2019 02:10:09 UTC+1, Brian M wrote:
>
> Am I really the only one having this problem? Having the error ticket
> system not work seems like a pretty significant obstacle to using web2py
> with python 3.7
--
Resources:
- http:/
It should be fixed in master branch
https://github.com/web2py/web2py/issues/1998. Not sure when new official
version will be released.
--
Resources:
- http://web2py.com
- http://web2py.com/book (Documentation)
- http://github.com/web2py/web2py (Source code)
- https://code.google.com/p/web2py/i
Hi,
I would agree that the docs should be updated: download page, deployment in
web2py group etc...
Le mardi 10 avril 2018 00:10:35 UTC+2, Jurgis Pralgauskis a écrit :
>
> Would be good if Py3 support would be highlighted in Instructions
> http://web2py.com/init/default/download
> as now it
Would be good if Py3 support would be highlighted in Instructions
http://web2py.com/init/default/download
as now it says
> python*2.7* web2py.py
Because most guys go there
ps.: and because https://youtu.be/GudJlbK4TY8
>
--
Resources:
- http://web2py.com
- http://web2py.com/book (Document
Python 2 might be a little more stable for now until Python 3 gets more
usage and the remaining bugs are identified and fixed.
On Sunday, March 11, 2018 at 11:21:19 AM UTC-4, Andrea Fae' wrote:
>
> Can I really use web2py with Python 3? I fell they are a lot of bugs...Is
> it better to stay in t
Let's be clear web2py supported python3 for some time thanks to you,
Paolo, and many others. Support is getting betters. yet one needs web2py
apps written in python 3 to run with web2py on python 3. Apps written for
python 2 will not work without some refactoring.
On Saturday, 10 February 2
It has already happened. Web2py does support python 3, if you see all the
latest commits in the github repository have been to fix python 3 issues as
obviously it hasn't been tested as much as python 2.7. Problems you have
due to python 3 are considered web2py bugs so it's definitely supported.
Please submit an issue in github so we can track this, we need to
use urllib.request.getproxies() for python 3.
--
Resources:
- http://web2py.com
- http://web2py.com/book (Documentation)
- http://github.com/web2py/web2py (Source code)
- https://code.google.com/p/web2py/issues/list (Report Issues
Glad to have you back! Make sure to report any issues you find as the
python 3 support is very new.
--
Resources:
- http://web2py.com
- http://web2py.com/book (Documentation)
- http://github.com/web2py/web2py (Source code)
- https://code.google.com/p/web2py/issues/list (Report Issues)
---
You r
There is no Python 3 migration. Mind it is not a technical issue. web2py
promises backward compatibility and we cannot port it to python 3 without
breaking that promise. Almost none of the users have expressed an interest
in helping moving existing code to Python 3.
There will be some other fr
Hi,
Good thread all in all. I'm eager to start with python3 but if web2py isn't
working with it, then why start with p3 in the first place?
Since most of my currently important python applications are web2py based.
Many other scripts rely on MoinMoin (same story) and for other scripts many
ar
On Friday, June 7, 2013 3:36:49 AM UTC+2, Anthony wrote:
>
> For example, I need web2py to provide python 2.6 compatibility for at
>> least another 5 years. I'm going to need python 2.7 compatibility for at
>> least another 10 years if not longer.
>
>
> I don't know if your particular application
>
> For example, I need web2py to provide python 2.6 compatibility for at
> least another 5 years. I'm going to need python 2.7 compatibility for at
> least another 10 years if not longer.
I don't know if your particular application(s) make use of many other
Python libraries, but if they do,
There is a lot of individual, anecdotal data in threads like this...
For example, I need web2py to provide python 2.6 compatibility for at least
another 5 years. I'm going to need python 2.7 compatibility for at least
another 10 years if not longer. And I couldn't care less for python 3
compati
Migrating to new platforms is easy. You just have to put back the Start
button.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"web2py-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to web2py+unsubscr...@googleg
Well, that's an issue with breaking compatibility. I've seen it happen
several times with Python 2.x to 3.x, Zope 2.x to 3.x and the whole Zope
Five fiasco. The problem is when you break compatibility you are
essentially telling your developers that all that hard work they did will
have to be d
Even for existing users, at some point sticking with Python 2 can start to
become a liability as some new libraries are released in Python 3 only or
existing libraries migrate to Python 3 only. I use rpy2, which is an
interface between Python and R, and the latest development branch has
dropped
That's not true for me. I have been fascinated with web2py for the longest
time, and now I'm finally able to use it, I was sincerely hoping that there
would be a Python 3 option. But since I do not know anything about web2py
at all at this point, it makes it a daunting proposition to consider
h
Do you mean work to make code in https://github.com/mdipierro/web3py
run in python 2.x and 3.x?
Would it be worth the effort? Codebase is 4 months old.
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Massimo Di Pierro
wrote:
> There is one specific thing I asked help with. Can we make the existing code
> ther
There is one specific thing I asked help with. Can we make the existing
code there working with 2.x and 3.x? I am not asking for adding features.
On Sunday, 14 April 2013 09:30:55 UTC-5, Marin Pranjić wrote:
>
> @Massimo,
>
> "I think it is too soon to start contributing to web3py because I am
@Massimo,
"I think it is too soon to start contributing to web3py because I am not
sure where it is going."
source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/web2py-developers/25k9BdtCKIA/AF5F_yI8ojcJ
I'm sure there are more of us who would contribute more or less ;)
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 7:48 PM, M
I did not say web3py runs on python 3. But we rewrote code to be python 3
friendly and it is a goal to make it work on python 3. Thanks for your
offer of helping.
On Saturday, 13 April 2013 13:18:43 UTC-5, samuel bonilla wrote:
>
> python3 runme.py
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> Fil
python3 runme.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "runme.py", line 2, in
from web3py import run
File "/home/python/Escritorio/todo/web3py-master/web3py/__init__.py",
line 1, in
from .wsgi import run
File "/home/python/Escritorio/todo/web3py-master/web3py/wsgi.py", line
10, i
>
> Nobody helped with it. That shows how much interest there is here about
> Python 3.x.
Is there any introductory documentation on the web3py project? It could
help those wanting to collaborate with the development or other areas. For
example, I'm interested in plans to support or developme
Thanks for your prompt replies. I'll check out web3py on github to see how
far along you've come, and whether I can contribute.
On Friday, April 12, 2013 8:51:23 PM UTC-4, twan...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'm interested (very interested) in a Python web framework that works with
> Python 3.x (
Nobody helped with it. That shows how much interest there is here about
Python 3.x.
On Saturday, 13 April 2013 12:27:04 UTC-5, Alec Taylor wrote:
>
> Looks like it hasn't been updated for 4 months…
>
> I will bump up the feature thread of it.
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Massimo Di Pier
Looks like it hasn't been updated for 4 months…
I will bump up the feature thread of it.
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Massimo Di Pierro
wrote:
> We will not do the mistake Python made: break backward compatibility and not
> make it worthwhile.
>
> We are already working on web3py. It is on g
We will not do the mistake Python made: break backward compatibility and
not make it worthwhile.
We are already working on web3py. It is on github. You can already help us
port it to python 3.0. yet the which will be worthwile. better internal
logic, better helpers, better forms, etc. Once that
I have a proposal called 'web2py +' which is to give support to python 3.x,
is the same code but support is for python 3.x, 'web2py plus' is for
developers who want to migrate to python 3.x
is only a proposal, I have not started work, I want to hear comments about
it
thanks...
El vierne
Web2py will never be ported to Python 3 (this is a lie, it was ported twice
but it will never be official because it would break our promise of
backward compatibility).
We are working on web3py. It will work on Python 3 and Python 2. It will be
different from web2py but, when on Python 2 it will
I'm all for having not spending effort to move to Python 3 due to
resource constraints etc.
However, I am curious as to whether having a minimum viable python 3
port will help bring more eyeballs/users to web2py, since hardly any
python web frameworks have moved to Python 3.
The main development
+1
On Jul 13, 11:26 am, Bruno Rocha wrote:
> May be, the new project could be a kind of merge with Bottle
> (http://bottlepy.org/docs/dev/, Web2py libs fits perfectly with Bottle, and
> bottle has a very nice base system. Maybe we cam have a bottle2py-project
> with Python3 as goal.
for the record, i -only- use py3. python 3.2 came out almost half a
year ago and i deployed it on my pack of servers a couple months ago.
everything i do is in 3.2 now. previously i used 3.1. i've ported a
few projects to py3 for my own uses - tried to provide patches but
many packages are dorma
I am fine with "Web3py". Atleast we start a step that way towards
Python 3.x ..
On Jul 13, 7:28 pm, Caleb Hattingh wrote:
> Agreed, I think web2py on Py3 is pointless.
>
> An entirely different project, called, let's say, web3py, which runs on Py3
> is a different animal altogether...
>
> On 13 J
May be, the new project could be a kind of merge with Bottle (
http://bottlepy.org/docs/dev/, Web2py libs fits perfectly with Bottle, and
bottle has a very nice base system. Maybe we cam have a bottle2py-project
with Python3 as goal.
Is it worth calling the prototype version *before* web3py: web3000py? Or would
that be unbearably geeky?
Sent from my iPad
On 13 Jul 2011, at 5:21 PM, Massimo Di Pierro
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Jul 13, 9:28 am, Caleb Hattingh wrote:
>> Agreed, I think web2py on Py3 is pointless.
>>
>> An entirel
+1
On Jul 13, 9:28 am, Caleb Hattingh wrote:
> Agreed, I think web2py on Py3 is pointless.
>
> An entirely different project, called, let's say, web3py, which runs on Py3
> is a different animal altogether...
>
> On 13 July 2011 15:50, Anthony wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > The problem is, it would br
On Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:28:03 AM UTC-4, pbreit wrote:
>
> The only big reason I could see doing anything on Python 3 right now is
> that it'd be the only framework on 3...
>
Except for CherryPy: http://www.cherrypy.org/wiki/WhatsNewIn32
Agreed, I think web2py on Py3 is pointless.
An entirely different project, called, let's say, web3py, which runs on Py3
is a different animal altogether...
On 13 July 2011 15:50, Anthony wrote:
> The problem is, it would break backward compatibility.
>
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2011 12:54:57 AM
I think Massimo may have indicated that one idea for Python 3 is to start
from scratch and he had some ideas (hence, "Web3py").
The only big reason I could see doing anything on Python 3 right now is that
it'd be the only framework on 3 since I don't think anyone is really
contemplating using 3
Small correction here:
New features, ideas, and ways of doing things could be created without
*worrying
about* breaking backwards-compatibility because your Python2.x web2py apps
wouldn't work on Python 3 anyways
Very true, we would need to create another branch of web2py, do the initial
conversion to Python 3, then try to maintain it, coding updates and new
features twice: once for Python 2.x and once again for Python 3.x, since the
two have different coding requirements. Then both would need to be test
The problem is, it would break backward compatibility.
On Wednesday, July 13, 2011 12:54:57 AM UTC-4, Rahul wrote:
> Its true that there are existing python versions 2.6, 2.7.x but what I
> would like is Web2py support for Python 3.
> Reasons:
> 1. We should provide early support for Python 3
Let us know about any problems you find when you try web2py on Py3.x, ok?
Its true that there are existing python versions 2.6, 2.7.x but what I
would like is Web2py support for Python 3.
Reasons:
1. We should provide early support for Python 3 (regardless of what
wsgi standard it will provide) because it may trigger a lot of python
users to adopt Web2py as it might be t
It may, in fact, be necessary. According to
http://docs.python.org/py3k/whatsnew/3.0.html:
"It is not recommended to try to write source code that runs unchanged under
both Python 2.6 and 3.0; you’d have to use a very contorted coding style,
e.g. avoiding print statements, metaclasses, and muc
I'd be interested to see what something like 2to3 would say about web2py's
compatibility with Python3:
http://docs.python.org/library/2to3.html
http://diveintopython3.org/porting-code-to-python-3-with-2to3.html
The other wild idea, of course, is to keep web2py on Python 2.x (assuming
that is going to be around as long as you suggest) and make web3py for
Python 3.x, IOW a new framework where different ideas can be tried without
affecting backward compatiblityI'm sure you have played with this idea
On Monday, 11 July 2011 16:13:39 UTC+2, Massimo Di Pierro wrote:
>
> Do not worry about the statements above. I am prepared to bet money there
> will be a 2.8 and it not there will be a fork from sombody.
>
:)
I have seen a lot of quite strong statements from various members of the
core Python
You might be very secured by this presentation :
http://www.google.com/events/io/2011/sessions/python-google.html
Guido himself expose a planning of Python future...
Very instructive presentation actually... A lot of littles insides
informations for outsider...
Richard
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1
When Python 3.x gets better than Python 2.x (faster, better
concurrency, better web support), than we will consider a web3py. Do
not worry about the statements above. I am prepared to bet money there
will be a 2.8 and it not there will be a fork from sombody.
On Jul 11, 8:52 am, Ross Peoples wrot
I know it's on the radar, but I don't know to what extent. I am guessing
that it won't be an immediate priority until operating systems like Mac OS
X, Ubuntu, and RHEL/CentOS start shipping Python3 by default. Python3, being
the next-generation of Python as it were, is still new and these operat
56 matches
Mail list logo
