Pete Wyckoff <pw@xxxxxxxx>:
> esr@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:13 -0500:
> > diff --git a/git-p4.py b/git-p4.py
> > index 551aec9..ec060b4 100755
> > --- a/git-p4.py
> > +++ b/git-p4.py
> > @@ -12,6 +12,11 @@ import optparse, sys, os, marshal, subprocess, shelve
> > import tempfile, getopt, os.path, time, platform
> > import re, shutil
> >
> > +if sys.hexversion < 0x02040000:
> > + # The limiter is the subprocess module
> > + sys.stderr.write("git-p4.py: requires Python 2.4 or later.")
> > + sys.exit(1)
> > +
> > verbose = False
>
> If 2.3 does not have the subprocess module, this script will fail
> at the import, and not run your version test.
Yes, the import of subprocess should move to after the check.
> All the uses of sys.stderr.write() should probably include a
> newline. Presumably you used write instead of print to avoid
> 2to3 differences.
That is correct.
> The name of this particular script, as users would type it, is
> "git p4"; no dash and no ".py".
>
> Many of your changes have these three problems; I just picked on
> my favorite one.
Should I resubmit, or do you intend to fix these while merging?
> > diff --git a/git-remote-testgit.py b/git-remote-testgit.py
> > index 5f3ebd2..22d2eb6 100644
> > --- a/git-remote-testgit.py
> > +++ b/git-remote-testgit.py
> > @@ -31,6 +31,11 @@ from git_remote_helpers.git.exporter import GitExporter
> > from git_remote_helpers.git.importer import GitImporter
> > from git_remote_helpers.git.non_local import NonLocalGit
> >
> > +if sys.hexversion < 0x01050200:
> > + # os.makedirs() is the limiter
> > + sys.stderr.write("git-remote-testgit.py: requires Python 1.5.2 or later.")
> > + sys.exit(1)
> > +
>
> This one, though, is a bit of a lie because git_remote_helpers
> needs 2.4, and you add that version enforcement in the library.
Agreed. The goal here was simply to have the depedencies of the individual
scripts be clearly documented, and establish a practice for future
submitters to emulate.
> I assume what you're trying to do here is to make the
> version-related failures more explicit, rather than have users
> parse an ImportError traceback, e.g.
See above. At least half the point is making our dependencies
explicit rather than implicit, so we can make better policy
decisions.
> But what about the high-end of the version range? I'm pretty
> sure most of these scripts will throw syntax errors on >= 3.0,
> how should we catch that before users see it?
That's a problem for another day, when 3.x is more widely deployed.
I'd be willing to run 2to3 on these scripts and check forward
compatibility.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html