[Python-Dev] dear core-devs

[Petr Viktorin]

On 10/4/18 9:34 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> If IBM wants a better Python support, it would help a lot if IBM pays 
> for this development. With money, you can easily find core dev 
> contractors. Antoine Pitrou has been paid in the past to enhance Python 
> support in Solaris and it worked well.

Michael explicitly said this is a personal effort. IBM or other big 
money is not involved.

Is paying the best way to get features into Python? Does becoming a core 
dev mean you can now get paid for approving changes? Some of the 
implications are quite disturbing :(


> Le mercredi 3 octobre 2018, Michael Felt <aixtools at felt.demon.nl 
> <mailto:aixtools at felt.demon.nl>> a écrit :
>  >
>  >
>  > On 10/2/2018 11:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>  >> On 10/2/2018 12:41 PM, Simon Cross wrote:
>  >>> Are there any core devs that Michael or Erik could collaborate with?
>  >>> Rather than rely on adhoc patch review from random core developers.
>  >>
>  >> You two might collaborate with each other to the extent of reviewing
>  >> some of each other's PRs.
>  > Might be difficult. We both, or at least I, claim ignorance of the
>  > others platform. I still have a lot of PEP to learn, and my idea of a
>  > bug-fix (for Python2) was seen by core-dev as a feature change. I would
>  > not feel comfortable trying to mentor someone in things PEP, etc..
>  >> That still leaves the issue of merging.
>  > How much confidence is there in all the "CI" tests? Does that not offer
>  > sufficient confidence for a core-dev to press merge.
>  > How about "master" continuing to be what it is, but insert a new
>  > "pre-master" branch that the buildbots actually test on (e.g., what is
>  > now the 3.X) and have a 3.8 buildbot - for what is now the "master".
>  >
>  > PR would still be done based on master, but an "initial" merge would be
>  > via the pre-master aka 3.X buildbot tests.
>  >
>  > How "friendly" git is - that it not become such a workload to keep it
>  > clean - I cannot say. Still learning to use git. Better, but still do
>  > not want to assume it would be easy.
>  >
>  > My hope is that it would make it easier to consider a "merge" step that
>  > gets all the buildbots involved for even broader CI tests.
>  >
>  >>
>  >>> Michael and Eric: Question -- are you interested in becoming core
>  >>> developers at least for the purposes of maintaining these platforms in
>  >>> future?
>  >>
>  >> Since adhoc is not working to get merges, I had this same suggestion.
>  >> Michael and Erik, I presume you have gotten some guidelines on what
>  >> modifications to C code might be accepted, and what concerns people 
> have.
>  > imho: guidelines - paraphrased - as little as possible :)
>  >
>  > I have many assumptions, and one of those is that my assumptions are
>  > probably incorrect.
>  > Goal: have AIX recognized as a Stable platform, even if not in the
>  > highest supported category.
>  > And that implies, support as far as I am able, to keep it "Stable".
>  >>
>  >> I think for tests, a separate test_aix.py might be a good idea for
>  >> aix-only tests
>  > Unclear to me how this would work. Too young in Python I guess (or just
>  > a very old dog), but what test would be needed for AIX, or any other
>  > platform, that would not need to be tested in some fashion for the
>  > 'other' platforms. At a hunch, where there are many platform.system()
>  > dependencies expected (e.g., test_posix, maybe doing something in the
>  > class definition (is there a "Root" Object/Class that all inherit from.
>  > Maybe a (read-only) "root" attribute (or is property better?) could be
>  > the value of platform.system(), and iirc, might be used by as @property
>  > in unittest. (so, if not in "root" class, then in something like
>  > unittest/__init__.py.
>  >
>  > I hope to be "close" in "Python thinking" - enough that someone who
>  > actually knows how the pieces fit together could come with a better, and
>  > more appropriate guideline/implementation.
>  >
>  >> , while modification of other tests might be limited to adding skips.
>  >> The idea would be to make it easy to remove aix stuff in the future if
>  >> it again became unsupported.
>  > IMHO: IBM and AIX do not mention it, but for openstack cloudmanagement
>  > (very specifically cloud-init) AIX needs a recognized stable Python
>  > implementation. I am "surprised" in the level of communication of IBM
>  > with Python community.
>  >
>  > Personally, I do not see AIX as a specialized platform. Feels more like
>  > the "last-standing" fully supported (commercial OEM) 'POSIX-UNIX'. Of
>  > course my focus is narrow - so maybe there is a lot of support for
>  > commercial platforms such as HPUX, Solaris, and other mainstream UNIXes.
>  > Feel free to correct me!!
>  >> Ditto for other specialized platforms.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Python-Dev mailing list
>  > Python-Dev at python.org <mailto:Python-Dev at python.org>
>  > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>  > Unsubscribe: 
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vstinner%40redhat.com
>  >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/encukou%40gmail.com
>