On 12/04/2015 10:26 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 10:04:54AM -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 12/02/2015 08:05 AM, Toshio くらとみ wrote:
[snip]
Do it when a RHEL releases with python3:
* sysadmins will have to manage both RHEL7 and RHEL8 web servers for py2 and py3.
* Concentrated work for developers to get applications ported as we'll want to migrate to rhel8 and python2 web apps will be holding us back.
* Packagers will have to branch (and sometimes maintain) needed packages from Fedora to EPEL.
RHEL currently provides python3 via SCL. Is this insufficient for
infrastructure's needs?
Python3 itself isn't the problem, it's the whole stack of dependencies that we
need in addition to python.
Packaging things for EPEL means it's available to everyone and anyone can
contribute/build upon it, we know how the system and the packaging work, it's
easy for us to add new components and fix others.
Packaging things for SCL means, it's nowhere but our infra repo since we can't
push things to RH's SCLs and SCLs are neither in Fedora nor in EPEL, it's more
work as we'll need to figure out how SCLs work and how packaging for SCLs work
and it makes it a much more closed system from a contribution point of view.
For context, my primary interest is there being a smooth course for
developers and users to move from Python 2 to 3, preferably *before* a
new RHEL major release comes out. If EPEL is meeting your needs
that's great, but if you need something from RHEL that'd be good to
know. Thanks,
--
Brendan Conoboy / RHEL Development Coordinator / Red Hat, Inc.
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
