Can I ask, have the django core team already accepted that Django will eventually be a 3.x framework, or will it be un-officially forked?
Personally - I'd love to see people ride the 2.x train until its last dying breath, but that's just me ;) Cal 2011/9/14 Ákos Péter Horváth <horvath.akos.pe...@gmail.com> > Another vote to python3 :-) > > Really, I started to port that with a recursive 2to3. It is not too far > from good working. There are no big magic things, altough I think a py2 and > py3 support isn't possible from a common source tree. Some deep core > improvement is needed too, mostly on the unicode line, but nothing really > hard. > > Anybody knows somebody who started a django/py3 port already? We should > unify our efforts. > > If core team doesn't like the py3 idea, we should start with a patch which > follows always the latest devel version. I strongly anticipate a project > fork (see what happened with the plone & bluebream). > > 2to3 (3to2), etc are good start for an initial port, but I think they > aren't enough to do this on day-to-day base. Their conversion algo isn't > enough, some handwork is needed. > > thank you > > MaXX > > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Daniel Lindsley <polarc...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Jannis, >> >> >> I wasn't trying to suggest we leave anyone behind, far from it. I >> was suggesting move the code to Python 3 now, while there's less code >> there (than some future date) but using 3to2[1] to help others on >> Python 2.X. Since Django still supports 2.5, it's possible that this >> isn't even an option, as I don't know if 3to2 can translate back that >> far reliably. Simply getting the question out there for others to mull >> over. >> >> >> Daniel >> >> >> >> On Sep 14, 10:36 am, Jannis Leidel <lei...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Daniel, >> > >> > > "You have my sword." I want to see this happen & would love to be a >> > > part of it. >> > >> > Huzzah! >> > >> > > A couple questions: >> > >> > > * How should patches be provided? Trac? BitBucket? >> > >> > For now via Trac, that's why we've moved the changes into a SVN branch. >> > Unless anyone has a better idea I could create a Trac component "Python >> 3" >> > so we can track the tickets easily. >> > >> > > * Where should feedback go? This mailing list? Somewhere else? >> > >> > Feedback should go here, on the developers mailing list, to get as many >> > eyes on it as possible. >> > >> > > * This is further off, but once we have a ported Django, how do get >> > > the community (specifically pluggable apps) onboard? I'm assuming the >> > > docs are meant to do this but wondering if there's anything else we >> > > can be doing (like perhaps a Django-specific 2to3 (extension?) to >> > > cover common Django conventions). >> > >> > Very good question, I'm uncertain as to how the "helpers" I mentioned >> > will look like in the end. Whether they will be part of Django (e.g. >> > a management command to run 2to3 on an app) or if we "only" provide the >> > necessary compatibility library (e.g. "six") so that 3rd party app >> > authors would still keep writing apps with Python 2 but would allow >> > their apps to be translated to Python 3 automatically. Documenting ways >> > of how to write a setup.py to do the conversion during install time >> > is *in* the scope of what we need to provide, IMO. Whether we need >> > Django-specific 2to3 fixers isn't clear at this time as the porting >> > has only just begun. >> > >> > > * Do we have a target date? I know this is hard with a volunteer-only >> > > effort, but if we setup some sort of timeline, we'd at least have a >> > > metric & something to shoot/push for. >> > >> > One assumption of the strategy I outlined was the fact that Django is >> > as close to 3.X as possible. Django 1.4 will require Python 2.5 or >> > higher, but I'm not sure how quick we can do the jump to 2.6, which >> > is recommended by the Python porting docs [1]. >> > >> > > Finally, a philosophical question on approach: Should we really be >> > > doing 2to3 (leaving the Django codebase in Python 2.X for a long time) >> > > or would it be better to port Django over to Python 3 & use 3to2 for >> > > existing Python 2.X installs? I confess I don't know much about the >> > > current state of 3to2 (nor how most other Python libraries are >> > > handling the transition). But I do know Django will continue to grow >> > > over time & I worry that, at some point in the future we'll be making >> > > more even more work for someone else to do the 3-only work. >> > >> > I personally haven't ported a 2.X library completely to 3.X yet, so I >> > can also only guess. But from what I've seen in the community I'm afraid >> > of a "clean cut" port because it has a high risk of leaving many >> projects >> > and apps behind. In that sense it seems more sensible to me to see the >> > port to Python 3 just as another step of our Python version deprecation >> > policy, which we at some point take with a complete conversion. >> Basically >> > a "burn bridges as soon as everyone is safe" approach :) >> > >> > I don't dare to guess when that moment could be though, but it would >> probably >> > happen after a potential Python 2.7 only release of Django -- whenever >> that is. >> > >> > Jannis >> > >> > 1: >> http://docs.python.org/py3k/howto/pyporting.html#try-to-support-pytho... >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > On Sep 14, 8:03 am, Jannis Leidel <lei...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> Hi all, >> > >> > >> After last week's sprint I wanted to get you up-to-speed about the >> > >> current state of porting Django to Python 3. >> > >> > >> As some may be aware Martin von Löwis has been working on a port for >> > >> a while [1] but only recently I've had the chance to meet with him >> and >> > >> talk through the porting process. >> > >> > >> I'm not going to hide the fact that it'll be a long process, but I'm >> > >> also convinced it's an important step for Django to make. I'm writing >> > >> this in the hope to find volunteers to join the porting efforts. >> > >> > >> Goals >> > >> ----- >> > >> > >> To allow Django to run on Python 3 there are several goals to >> achieve, >> > >> some of which are our respsonsibility, some depend on 3rd party >> libraries >> > >> we use internally and some left to the users that use Django to build >> > >> their websites. It's my understanding that we can't solve everything >> > >> at once, so take this with a grain of salt: >> > >> > >> - get Django to run on Python 3 >> > >> - provide helpers and docs for porting Django-based projects >> > >> - help out 3rd party projects we rely only to make the jump (if >> needed) >> > >> > >> Porting strategies >> > >> ------------------ >> > >> > >> As you can imagine there are still quite a few open questions at >> > >> the moment about specific porting problems but taking from the >> > >> experience in the Python community I think we have a good general >> > >> strategy. >> > >> > >> There are a few assumptions we're applying either because it's >> > >> unrealistic or impossible to maintain as long as Python 2.X is in >> > >> use for the forseeable future; so these strategy *don't* work: >> > >> > >> - Create a Python 3 only port ("burning the bridges") >> > >> > >> This is outright a no-go since it would leave all the Python 2.X >> > >> projects in dead water. Instead we need to provide a migration >> > >> path for them. >> > >> > >> - Maintaing a separate Python 3 branch ("dual releases") >> > >> > >> While this would allow for new projects to use Python 3, I'm >> > >> convinced this has the potential to split the community. It'd >> > >> also be a major burden for the core team to maintain both >> > >> branches. Instead we need a combined effort. >> > >> > >> So as a result of that the only viable option is to support both >> major >> > >> versions of Python at the same time, with the same code base. >> > >> > >> Fortunately the Python community gained lots of experience in the >> past >> > >> years to make this happen (e.g. Lennart Regebro's book [4]). There >> are >> > >> also tools to ease the transition of Django and the Django-based >> > >> projects. Some of which are: >> > >> > >> - six [3] -- a compatibility library that includes many (if not all) >> > >> needed import proxies and utilities to prepare Django and >> Django-based >> > >> projects to be ported to Python 3.X. This only applies to API that >> > >> isn't syntactically changed, but only moved or enhanced in 3.X. >> > >> > >> - 2to3 [2] -- an extensible library which is able to translate the >> rest >> > >> of the Python 2 code to the Python 3 equivalent. For every Django >> > >> specific feature that isn't covered by the default 2to3 "fixers" we >> can >> > >> write our own if needed. It integrates with distutils (in Python >> 3.X) >> > >> and is able to convert Django at installation time. Installing >> Django >> > >> with Python 2 wouldn't trigger the translation process, of course. >> > >> > >> Code status >> > >> ----------- >> > >> > >> During the sprint we've moved Martin's code from a Bitbucket clone to >> > >> an own SVN branch: >> > >> > >> >> https://code.djangoproject.com/browser/django/branches/features/py3k/ >> > >> > >> Some notable changes: >> > >> > >> - a modified ``setup.py`` which automatically calls 2to3 during >> installation >> > >> > >> - a ``py3ktest`` helper bash script which -- for now -- installs >> Django in >> > >> a directory called "3k" in the same directory to trigger the >> translation >> > >> from Python 2 to Python 3 code and then run the tests from the >> build >> > >> directory directly because they are not part of the installation in >> "3k" >> > >> because we don't include it. This script should be seen a temporary >> > >> workaround till we've found a better way to run the tests (Could we >> use >> > >> tox instead? [5]). >> > >> > >> - a new django.utils.py3 module which contains some helpers that are >> used >> > >> throughout the code as a common API to ease the pain of maintaining >> a >> > >> project that runs on both Python 2 and 3. I expect it to grow in >> size >> > >> while we port Django, but even then it may not be complete enough >> to >> > >> be useful for Django-based user projects. Which is why I think >> Django >> > >> should ship the "six" library [3] instead, on the long run ("six" >> has >> > >> the advantage of being maintained by a Python core developer). >> > >> > >> A good overview of the current changes can be seen on Bitbucket: >> > >> > >> https://bitbucket.org/django/django/compare/features/py3k..default >> > >> > >> Right now it's mostly changes to how byte and unicode strings are >> handled >> > >> by using a b() and u() function instead of the 'u' prefix. That said, >> > >> this is far from complete. >> > >> > >> How to help >> > >> ----------- >> > >> > >> We have multiple big pieces of the puzzle to solve: >> > >> > >> - Try out the branch by running the tests with the ``py3ktest`` >> script >> > >> and fix the failed tests (needs an installed ``python3`` binary), >> one >> > >> by one. This may be repetitive work, but could also be the chance >> for >> > >> you to dive into the internals of Django. >> > >> > >> - Write a tutorial to prepare a Django app to for Python 3 by using >> one >> > >> of the tools we provide. Have a look at the official porting guides >> [6] >> > >> for inspiration. >> > >> > >> - Help port the 3rd party libraries we rely on in Django (e.g. >> MySQLdb [7]) >> > >> by getting in touch with their community. >> > >> > >> There are probably lots of other small steps to make, but I'm >> confident that >> > >> we'll figure them out on the way. >> > >> > >> Let's start the porting, Python 3 is waiting for us, >> > >> Jannis >> > >> > >> 1:https://bitbucket.org/loewis/django-3k/ >> > >> 2:http://docs.python.org/library/2to3.html >> > >> 3:http://pypi.python.org/pypi/six >> > >> 4:http://python3porting.com/ >> > >> 5:http://tox.readthedocs.org/ >> > >> 6:http://docs.python.org/py3k/howto/pyporting.html >> > >> 7: >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/mysql-python/forums/forum/70460/topic... >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Django developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
