On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 04:44:19 -0500 (EST) Bohuslav Kabrda <bkabrda@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I just had a quick IRC chat with DNF maintainer and he said we still > wants to switch to py3 for F22. Lovely. Perhaps we could get the dnf folks, anaconda, qa and fesco all together in one place to discuss this? > > We will not be replacing python2 entirely, it and packages that > > depend on it will still be available for now. > > Doesn't [1] say it? Fair enough. I looked for that wording and didn't see it. ;( > Yeah, as noted by Stephen Smoogen, I think the problem is > communication here. Judging from reactions of people who I talked to, > everyone takes it as "FESCo thinks that Python 3 is not ready and not > the way to go right now". That's also what I thought when I read > simple "defer this to F23". After these conversations here I'm > starting to understand that this is not a message that FESCo meant to > send. "Python 3 migration improvements" sounds about right to me and > seems to send a better message than just deferring to F23. Can > someone from FESCo comment on this? If this sounds ok, shall I create > a change page for it? I'm personally in favor of that, but I'm also in favor of deferring the dnf and anaconda python3 changes. But thats just IMHO. > As I noted above, DevAssistant devels have been using python3-dnf for > quite some time now without any issues. I've written couple of > scripts using python3-dnf and run them regularly without any issue. I > even replaced "#!/usr/bin/python" by "!#/usr/bin/python3" > in /usr/bin/dnf some time ago and everything still works (how ugly is > that? :)). I know, that's not extensive testing, but it's certainly > not zero. ok. Fair enough. Some small amount of testing. :) It's not at all the same scale as: "Been in fedora for years and we have asked people to test it a bunch for the last few years". I'm using dnf-3 here now and haven't hit any dnf-3 specific bugs, but that again is a small sample size. > > * anconda switches to python3 (it's almost ready, but no telling > > what issues we will hit, it's not even landed yet). > > > > Should we toss in a UI redesign so we can have Fedora 18 again? > > (sorry, that was rude of me) > > Why not :) You weren't here for Fedora 18 were you? ;) > I'd say we should leave this up to developers of DNF and Anaconda. > They're the best ones to say whether they're ready or not. I suppose so, but I think we should also take into account QA and others input. kevin
Attachment:
pgpqPHBmjVSEz.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
