On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> For reasons outlined at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s
> how_bug.cgi?id=1388447#c7, we would like to make Python 3 a requirement
> to build Firefox sometime in the Firefox 59 development cycle. (Firefox 59
> will be an ESR release.)
>
> The
It would make my heart sing if all python 3 code we write would have
defined types (using mypy in in ./mach lint). It would definitely remove
the feeling of "walking blindfolded" when doing any change with the python
tooling. At least I hope providing types would be allowed if not required.
-- Rok
As long as we follow PEP 394, I'm super excited. (including on our
mozilla-build windows system, which counts as 'unix-like')
On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 9:12 AM, David Burns wrote:
> I am not saying it should but if we have a requirement for python 3, we are
> also going to have a requirement for py
I am not saying it should but if we have a requirement for python 3, we are
also going to have a requirement for py2 to both be available for local
development.
David
On 11 November 2017 at 14:10, Andrew Halberstadt
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 9:44 PM David Burns wrote:
>
>> My only conce
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 9:44 PM David Burns wrote:
> My only concern about this is how local developer environments are going
> to be when it comes to testing. While I am sympathetic to moving to python
> 3 we need to make sure that all the test harnesses have been moved over and
> this is someth
Also sprach Gregory Szorc:
The requirement will likely be Python 3.5+. Although I would
love to make that 3.6 if possible so we can fully harness modern
features and performance.
Hold your horses with 3.6. Only Python 3.5.3 is at the time of
writing available in the most common Linux distribu
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 05:42:01PM -0800, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
> >
> > > I'm happy hearing this. I would be interested on whether we are going
> to
> > > drop Python 2 at some point, or
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 05:42:01PM -0800, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
>
> > I'm happy hearing this. I would be interested on whether we are going to
> > drop Python 2 at some point, or are we stuck with that forever?
> >
>
> Let's put it this way: w
My only concern about this is how local developer environments are going to
be when it comes to testing. While I am sympathetic to moving to python 3
we need to make sure that all the test harnesses have been moved over and
this is something that needs a bit of coordination. Luckily a lot of the
mo
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
> I'm happy hearing this. I would be interested on whether we are going to
> drop Python 2 at some point, or are we stuck with that forever?
>
Let's put it this way: we still have a few uses of Perl in the build
system. There have been no meani
I'm happy hearing this. I would be interested on whether we are going to
drop Python 2 at some point, or are we stuck with that forever?
Also I'm curious what modern features are the team looking forward to?
- Xidorn
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017, at 10:27 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> For reasons outlined
11 matches
Mail list logo
