[Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier

Michael Foord fuzzyman at gmail.com
Mon Dec 12 09:48:08 CET 2011


On 12 December 2011 07:28, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 23:36 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > > It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> > > have no current intention to port this code to Python 3".
> >
> > That classifier already exists: "Programming Language :: Python :: 2"
> > indicates support for Python 2, and absence of "Programming Language ::
> > Python :: 3" then indicates that this version lacks Python 3 support.
> > I don't think classifiers should be used to indicate some intention of
> > package authors, in particular since the intention may change, but
> > past releases will not.
>
> Thanks to Richard for adding the classifier.
>
> Point taken about past releases; lots of packages on PyPI have already
> seen their last release.
>
> But if the current party line in python-dev that goes something like "if
> you don't want to port to Python 3, you don't have to" is to be
> credible, then ongoing maintainers who choose not to port to Python 3
> should not be subject to pressure exhibited by sites like the "wall of
> shame".  Being able to express the no-port intent explicitly relieves
> the stupidest of those pressures.
>
> I'm sympathetic to the opinion "the wall of shame should not make a
> difference".  But we have a PR problem, because the wall of shame is
> linked endlessly from comments about Python 3 stores in every news
> aggregator (Reddit, Hacker News, etc).  People tend to use it as a stick
> to beat the helpless with.
>
>

Well sure - but python-dev has absolutely nothing to do with the
wall-of-shame. In addition whoever is responsible for it, is very
unresponsive and apparently not interested in fixing factual errors in the
list. So I doubt the new classifier will have any effect on that website
I'm afraid. :-(

Michael Foord


> > If you think that this is still different from what you are asking:
> > What specific packages would be tagged with that classifier (I need
> > two at least), and did that package authors agree to add the classifier
> > to their package if it was available? Which specific classifier do you
> > propose to add?
>
> The ones that I have some direct responsibility for are:
>
> - Supervisor
> - meld3
>
> The ones that I am one step removed from and can venture a very educated
> guess about because I participate on the related maillists and
> occasionally contribute are:
>
> - Routes
> - Pylons
> - zdaemon
> - ZConfig
> - most zope.* packages that aren't already py3 compat
> - The Zope2 package
> - The Plone package
> - The Acquisition package (Zope-related)
> - most zc.* packages
> - all five.* packages (Zope-related)
> - all plone.* packages
> - borg.localrole (Plone)
> - all archetypes.* packages (Plone)
> - all kss.* packages (Plone)
> - all Products.* packages (Zope2 products)
> - RestrictedPython
>
> All of these packages have > 90K downloads and are featured prominently
> on the wall of shame (they actually form a large portion of the
> "unported" stuff; 65 packages or so out of about 120).  To the extent
> that the above packages will see any new release, I suspect their
> maintainers would be happy to mark them "Python 2 only".
>
> - C
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>



-- 

http://www.voidspace.org.uk/

May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111212/cea5b04a/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Catalog-SIG mailing list