Hello! Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9? Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it) (not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the rationale behind it) Thanks! -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/ Twitter: @facundobatista
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:35, Facundo Batista <facundobatista@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello!
Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
(not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the rationale behind it)
I don't think there's been a formal decision, but I think the expectation is that we just go to 3.10. Certainly PEP 602 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0602/) assumes that in the description of the future release schedule. Paul
Everybody has long presumed we'd go with 3.10. Maybe we're not following semver to the letter, but this part of it we follow -- 4.0 would mean a major rewrite or incompatible change. For a long time I had hoped that Larry Hastings' Gilectomy project would succeed, in which case that would be a logical candidate for 4.0, since it requires a lot of incompatible C API changes. But Victor seems to have a better plan for evolving the C API, and the Gilectomy doesn't seem to be proceeding. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:45 AM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:35, Facundo Batista <facundobatista@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello!
Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
(not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the rationale behind it)
I don't think there's been a formal decision, but I think the expectation is that we just go to 3.10. Certainly PEP 602 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0602/) assumes that in the description of the future release schedule.
Paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/OFVOOZT3... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
On Nov 28, 2019, at 07:50, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
Everybody has long presumed we'd go with 3.10. Maybe we're not following semver to the letter, but this part of it we follow -- 4.0 would mean a major rewrite or incompatible change.
For a long time I had hoped that Larry Hastings' Gilectomy project would succeed, in which case that would be a logical candidate for 4.0, since it requires a lot of incompatible C API changes. But Victor seems to have a better plan for evolving the C API, and the Gilectomy doesn't seem to be proceeding.
I’ve always expected that 4.0 would be reserved for such incompatible C API changes. I remember we had a similar discussion when 2.7.x was rolling over to x > 9. We didn’t bump it to 2.8 then, so I think we should just be prepared for Python 3.10 when the time comes. -Barry
It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..." issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example: $ python3 Python 3.7.5 (default, Oct 17 2019, 12:16:48)
import sys sys.version_info = (4,0) import six Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/six.py", line 49, in <module> string_types = basestring, NameError: name 'basestring' is not defined
Victor Le jeu. 28 nov. 2019 à 16:36, Facundo Batista <facundobatista@gmail.com> a écrit :
Hello!
Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
(not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the rationale behind it)
Thanks!
-- . Facundo
Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/ Twitter: @facundobatista _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/M5N3PZP4... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death.
Hopefully by the time we actually *do* need to roll out 4.0, six will be dead, or at least its Python 2 support will be gone. And whatever is needed to make the upgrade smooth for people should be in in the 4.0 release, not a 3rd party library. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:53 AM Victor Stinner <vstinner@python.org> wrote:
It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..." issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example:
$ python3 Python 3.7.5 (default, Oct 17 2019, 12:16:48)
import sys sys.version_info = (4,0) import six Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/six.py", line 49, in <module> string_types = basestring, NameError: name 'basestring' is not defined
Victor
Le jeu. 28 nov. 2019 à 16:36, Facundo Batista <facundobatista@gmail.com> a écrit :
Hello!
Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
(not arguing in favor of one or another, just want to know the rationale behind it)
Thanks!
-- . Facundo
Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/ Twitter: @facundobatista _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/M5N3PZP4...
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/XLJDFJLI... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:55, Victor Stinner <vstinner@python.org> wrote:
It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..." issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example:
I've seen a few fixes to projects to remove assumptions that the "X" in 3.X is a single digit. So I think that the momentum in the community is definitely assuming 3.10 as well. Paul
I've appreciated Anthony Sottile's flake8-2020 plugin (https://pypi.org/project/flake8-2020/), which adds checks for a variety of misuses of sys.version and sys.version_info that would lead to breakage on a Python 4.0, and/or 10.0, in addition to Python 3.10.
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 9:50 PM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 15:55, Victor Stinner <vstinner@python.org> wrote:
It has been discussed a few months ago. There is the "if six.PY3: ..." issue and similar issues which should be solved first. Basic example:
I've seen a few fixes to projects to remove assumptions that the "X" in 3.X is a single digit. So I think that the momentum in the community is definitely assuming 3.10 as well.
CPython CI configuration itself had the assumption : https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/14831 . I think there were some issues raised with the title having [3.10] preparation for similar cases.
El jue., 28 de nov. de 2019 a la(s) 12:35, Facundo Batista (facundobatista@gmail.com) escribió:
Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
Thanks everybody for the responses. So 3.10 it is, not a hard made decision, but the collective trend. Should we have a PEP for this? -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org.ar/ Twitter: @facundobatista
On Fri., 29 Nov. 2019, 6:15 am Facundo Batista, <facundobatista@gmail.com> wrote:
El jue., 28 de nov. de 2019 a la(s) 12:35, Facundo Batista (facundobatista@gmail.com) escribió:
Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
Thanks everybody for the responses.
So 3.10 it is, not a hard made decision, but the collective trend.
Should we have a PEP for this?
We will at least have the 3.10 release schedule PEP, and the accepted release cadence change PEP uses 3.10 in its examples, but it's probably a good idea to have a short "Handle double-digit minor release numbers" PEP that explicitly summarises the compatibility issues that are likely to arise. https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0598/#why-not-switch-directly-to-full-se... touched on the topic during the release cadence change discussion, but the final set of PEPs for that (602, 605, 607) all took it for granted that we'd be publishing 3.10 after 3.9. Cheers, Nick. P.S. In addition to the flake8 plugin, Anthony Sottile also published https://github.com/asottile/python3.10 to help with checking compatibility in advance.
I presume that would be an informational PEP, right? On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 2:53 PM Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri., 29 Nov. 2019, 6:15 am Facundo Batista, <facundobatista@gmail.com> wrote:
El jue., 28 de nov. de 2019 a la(s) 12:35, Facundo Batista (facundobatista@gmail.com) escribió:
Did we take a decision of what comes after 3.9?
Do we have a PEP for that decision? (couldn't find it)
Thanks everybody for the responses.
So 3.10 it is, not a hard made decision, but the collective trend.
Should we have a PEP for this?
We will at least have the 3.10 release schedule PEP, and the accepted release cadence change PEP uses 3.10 in its examples, but it's probably a good idea to have a short "Handle double-digit minor release numbers" PEP that explicitly summarises the compatibility issues that are likely to arise.
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0598/#why-not-switch-directly-to-full-se... touched on the topic during the release cadence change discussion, but the final set of PEPs for that (602, 605, 607) all took it for granted that we'd be publishing 3.10 after 3.9.
Cheers, Nick.
P.S. In addition to the flake8 plugin, Anthony Sottile also published https://github.com/asottile/python3.10 to help with checking compatibility in advance.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6JE5UQZJ... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
On Fri., 29 Nov. 2019, 9:10 am Guido van Rossum, <guido@python.org> wrote:
I presume that would be an informational PEP, right?
I hadn't considered that, but you're right, an Informational PEP would make sense: there's no new decision to be made, we just want a clear place to capture the rationale and the anticipated issues. Cheers, Nick.
participants (8)
-
Barry Warsaw -
Brian Skinn -
Facundo Batista -
Guido van Rossum -
Karthikeyan -
Nick Coghlan -
Paul Moore -
Victor Stinner