On 23.07.2015 17:01, Bert Huijben wrote:
> I like this proposal... but I'm wondering in what case Linux build
> environments need python. Those very old enterprise versions are
> unlikely to have python 2.7 or newer.
When building from a tarball, you only need Python to run the test suite.
There are certain edge cases in the Python syntax where it's almost
impossible to be compatible with both 2.5/2.6 and 3.x. Because of that,
and because 2.6 is no longer supporter by the Python devs, it makes
sense to stop supporting those versions in 1.9/trunk.
Those very old enterprise versions will just have to be upgraded, IMO.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Branko Čibej <mailto:brane_at_wandisco.com>
> Sent: 23-7-2015 11:02
> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org <mailto:dev_at_subversion.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: 1.9.0 minimal Python version
>
> On 23.07.2015 10:30, Stefan Hett wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >>>> - For 1.9, it's a little late to make any changes, but I would
> >>>> consider
> >>>> dropping py2.5 support (and converting to the 'except' 'as'
> >>>> syntax),
> >>>> since for 1.9 py3 support is more important than py2.5 support.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts?
> >> I'd rather not mess with the 1.9 branch at this point ... we're so
> close
> >> to the release (I hope).
> >>
> >> -- Brane
> > as a thought for the 1.9 case:
> > In case you do not want to drop py2.5 support for 1.9 because it's
> > released stating that minimum support already, would it be an option
> > to still support py3 in a following patch (1.9.1)? For instance by
> > providing py-script versions for older as well as later versions?
> >
> > Reasoning would be that given that SVN-versions have a lifetime of
> > roughly 2 years before the successive version is released it'd be
> > quite a limitation if that'd only work with a very old python version...
> >
> > As an alternative approach: You'd also consider mentioning a minimum
> > requirement of python 2.6 just in the docs (no code changes yet) and
> > then release 1.9.1 with the actual "fixes". So technically then even
> > post release you would not change the minimal system requirements.
> >
> > (just some thoughts from a user's point of view, if that input would
> > be of any benefit)
>
> Daniel and I have just been chatting about this on IRC, and we agreed
> that it makes sense to just drop 2.5/2.6 support for 1.9 and trunk; the
> proposal is that we declare support for 2.7, and at some point make
> 1.9.x and trunk compatible with both 2.7 and 3.x.
>
> -- Brane
Received on 2015-07-23 17:46:31 CEST