On 05/27/2016 04:19 AM, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
However, Adi has mentioned that in this document: http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/wiki/Plan/Python3, the strategy of submitting incremental Python3 fixes is not mentioned. Before doing any further reviews, Adi would like clarification that these types of reviews/patches are OK for submission and review.
Are they OK? Would it be possible extend the Plan/Python3 document to accept incremental Python3 fixes as long as:
* adheres to Twisted coding standards * works on Python 2.7 * passes existing tests * comes with new tests if functionality is changed that is not currently being tested
My experience working with Python3 on other projects, is that incremental fixes is easier to review and get working, rather than an all or nothing approach. Some Python3 porting such as bytes/string/unicode or Python C API changes are very hard, while print vs. print() are very easy. Holding up the easy changes, until every hard change is also done is quite hard, and slows things down.
I think they're fine to accept insofar as: 1. There is strong ongoing momentum for the port now, so these changes makes porting module-by-module easier and won't just bitrot. 2. They're doing one particular incompatibility at a time, rather than "here's an assortment of random changes to a module that may or may not port that module fully, who knows." I don't think they are sufficient to port a module (someone needs to read the code and think a bit, usually), but they will make it easier to do so, so they definitely are worth continuing. -Itamar