[Piglit] [PATCH 0/5] Python 3 port, again

Jose Fonseca jfonseca at vmware.com
Wed Aug 5 04:11:07 PDT 2015

On 23/07/15 20:38, Dylan Baker wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 03:57:59PM +0100, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>> Python3 will definitely bring challenges to us.
>> It's no problem for our personal development systems, but there are
>> several systems which still only have python 2.x -- (systems we want to
>> run or build piglit.)
>> I wonder it would be possible to keep piglit using either Python 2 and 3
>> for an transitory period (e.g, 3 months), that would allows us to
>> gradualy migrate things, as opposed to close shop for several days.
>> On the other hand, I know it's tricky to make code that runs both on 2
>> and 3.  And we might get exposed to weird bugs either way.  I know we'll
>> have to bite the bullet sooner or later.
>> So maybe the the Python 2 branch works -- I can get the existing systems
>> to build and run Python 2 branch.  Then slowly start building and using
>> Python 3 based master branch.
>> For the record, IMHO, the decision of making Python 3 backwards
>> incompatible was a huge mistake.  If they introduced/deprecated the
>> new/old semantics incrementally they would get to world to migrate much
>> faster.  Instead they created this huge barrier, effectively keeping the
>> bulk of the world in Python 2 much longer.
>> Jose
> Sorry guys, I forgot about this..
> Anyway, For us, we're interested in python 3 for the new features it
> brings us, builtin xz support and builtin timeout support specifically.
> I'm willing to entertain whatever migration path we want, but ultimately
> we (Intel) want to be able to make use of python 3.3 features, so any
> plan that wouldn't allow that isn't really interesting to us.

I see.  If the new features is what interests you then a hybrid approach 
won't provide benefit to anybody.  Just complexity.

So instead of a slow and painful transition, we might as well do a quick 
and painful.

> If we can go to a hybrid approach for a time and make a transition to
> pure python 3 we're opened to that in place of maintaining two branches.
> Of course, the other people we'll need to to talk to are Red Hat, since
> they may have python 2.x requirements for some of their older releases.

August is a bad month, with lots of people on PTO etc.

What about merging Python 3, and forking Python 2, some fixed date in 
the middle of September?


More information about the Piglit mailing list