[Piglit] Requiring Python 3.x for Piglit?

Kenneth Graunke kenneth at whitecape.org
Wed Apr 17 10:37:18 PDT 2013

On 04/17/2013 05:21 AM, Tom Gall wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:48 AM, Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org> wrote:
>> Does anyone object to porting to Python 3.x (and dropping 2.x support)?
> I don't have strong objections, but more of a preference that 2.7+ and
> 3.x be supported.  My Ubuntu Raring (the next release of ubuntu)
> install for instance has 2.7.4 as the default and the Ubuntu wiki
> (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Python/3) indicates they don't plan to go to
> python 3 as the default until 14.04 LTS which would be next year.

But raring has it, so all you havo to do is:
# apt-get install python3 python3-mako python3-numpy

which seems pretty straightforward to me, and not painful enough to 
justify working around...

>> Some useful data points:
>> - Debian stable has 3.1, testing/unstable have 3.2
>> - Fedora 18 and Arch Linux have 3.3
>> - Windows installers for 3.3 are available on python.org
>> - Mac OS X support for 3.3 is also available on python.org
>> - numpy and mako are both available for Python 3 now.  numpy is packaged on
>> Arch and Debian testing/unstable.  Not sure how much of a pain it is to get
>> on Windows/OSX.
>> - intel-gpu-tools now requires Python 3.x to build.
>> Jon Severinsson did a great job in making a hybrid solution that works with
>> both Python 2 and 3, but I'm a bit nervous about some of it.  For example,
>> unicode stuff has bitten us in the past, and supporting only one major
>> language version seems a lot easier to get right.  It'd also be a lot
>> cleaner to just transition to Python 3.x.
> Sure supporting just one is easier, but we'd hardly be the only
> project that supports both. Substantial projects like OpenStack can do
> it, we can do it too.

We probably could, yeah...I just don't know if there's any real value 
for us in doing so.

More information about the Piglit mailing list