"python 2 only" classifier

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
29 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

"python 2 only" classifier

Yuval Greenfield
Hi catalog-sig, I'm the wall of shame guy,

This was just brought to my attention by Chris via reddit so I'm sorry
for chiming in late.

Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the utility of
> a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
> widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in mind,
> the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
> author intends to port to python3.

1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
it'll help the PR issue.

2. A more useful classifier (in terms of PR) could be "Programming
Language :: Python :: 2 :: Py3k equivalent exists". Which would denote
that I can entirely remove the red package from the wall. This is
currently done manually for the following: 'multiprocessing',
'simplejson', 'argparse', 'uuid', 'setuptools', 'Jinja'. So feel free
to tell me if there are more I should add to this list. A classifier
would mean more work for everyone, though it is the pure and correct
way to go about this.

And I hope I'm not considered the bad guy here. Please do contact me
with any questions or suggestions. I only want to promote python 3
though I know the site has a dual edge to its sword.


--Yuval
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Fuzzyman-2


On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi catalog-sig, I'm the wall of shame guy,

This was just brought to my attention by Chris via reddit so I'm sorry
for chiming in late.

Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the utility of
> a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
> widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in mind,
> the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
> author intends to port to python3.

1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
it'll help the PR issue.

2. A more useful classifier (in terms of PR) could be "Programming
Language :: Python :: 2 :: Py3k equivalent exists". Which would denote
that I can entirely remove the red package from the wall. This is
currently done manually for the following: 'multiprocessing',
'simplejson', 'argparse', 'uuid', 'setuptools', 'Jinja'. So feel free
to tell me if there are more I should add to this list.



unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k 

docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're not using the trove classifier. 


All the best,

Michael Foord


 
A classifier
would mean more work for everyone, though it is the pure and correct
way to go about this.

And I hope I'm not considered the bad guy here. Please do contact me
with any questions or suggestions. I only want to promote python 3
though I know the site has a dual edge to its sword.


--Yuval
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
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


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Yuval Greenfield
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the utility
>> > of
>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in
>> > mind,
>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
>> > author intends to port to python3.
>>
>
> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>
> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
> not using the trove classifier.
>

My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
skew the percentage.

Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.

Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
([hidden email]) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
one.


Yuval Greenfield
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Fuzzyman-2


On 13 December 2011 13:24, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the utility
>> > of
>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in
>> > mind,
>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
>> > author intends to port to python3.
>>
>
> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>
> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
> not using the trove classifier.
>

My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
skew the percentage.

Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.

Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
([hidden email]) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
one.


What do you mean by held responsible? If a package is Python 3 compatible, or has a Python 3 version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "wall of shame" (I *really* dislike the name for what it's worth and cringe every time I write it) reflect the truth?

All the best,

Michael
 


Yuval Greenfield



--
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


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Yuval Greenfield
I'm not sure this is the case, but easy_install/pip should check if
the package is python 3 compatible or not before installing. To quote
you:

If a package is Python 3 compatible, or has a Python 3
version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "The Python Package
Index" reflect the truth?

Yuval Greenfield

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On 13 December 2011 13:24, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>> >> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the
>> >> > utility
>> >> > of
>> >> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>> >> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in
>> >> > mind,
>> >> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a
>> >> > package's
>> >> > author intends to port to python3.
>> >>
>> >
>> > unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>> >
>> > docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if
>> > they're
>> > not using the trove classifier.
>> >
>>
>> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
>> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
>> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
>> skew the percentage.
>>
>> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
>> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
>> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
>>
>> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
>> ([hidden email]) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
>> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
>> one.
>
>
>
> What do you mean by held responsible? If a package is Python 3 compatible,
> or has a Python 3 version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "wall of
> shame" (I *really* dislike the name for what it's worth and cringe every
> time I write it) reflect the truth?
>
> All the best,
>
> Michael
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yuval Greenfield
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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
>
>
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Fuzzyman-2


On 13 December 2011 13:50, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm not sure this is the case, but easy_install/pip should check if
the package is python 3 compatible or not before installing. To quote
you:

If a package is Python 3 compatible, or has a Python 3
version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "The Python Package
Index" reflect the truth?


My initial reply went privately to Yuval (goddamn lists that don't have reply-to set correctly ;-). 

Anyway, even though the wall-of-shame states that it is based on the PyPI classifier, I think it would be less of a publicity own goal for the Python community, and would be much more *useful*, if packages that did support Python 3 showed up as green...

All  the best,

Michael Foord
 

Yuval Greenfield

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> On 13 December 2011 13:24, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>> >> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the
>> >> > utility
>> >> > of
>> >> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>> >> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in
>> >> > mind,
>> >> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a
>> >> > package's
>> >> > author intends to port to python3.
>> >>
>> >
>> > unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>> >
>> > docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if
>> > they're
>> > not using the trove classifier.
>> >
>>
>> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
>> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
>> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
>> skew the percentage.
>>
>> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
>> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
>> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
>>
>> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
>> ([hidden email]) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
>> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
>> one.
>
>
>
> What do you mean by held responsible? If a package is Python 3 compatible,
> or has a Python 3 version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "wall of
> shame" (I *really* dislike the name for what it's worth and cringe every
> time I write it) reflect the truth?
>
> All the best,
>
> Michael
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yuval Greenfield
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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
>
>



--
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


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

David Goodger
In reply to this post by Yuval Greenfield
Sorry, I have no idea what this message is about.
Some context/explanation please?
What action are you asking for?

Note that Lea Wiemann is no longer active in the Docutils project.

-- David Goodger

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:24, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the utility
>>> > of
>>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in
>>> > mind,
>>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
>>> > author intends to port to python3.
>>>
>>
>> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>>
>> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
>> not using the trove classifier.
>>
>
> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> skew the percentage.
>
> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
>
> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> ([hidden email]) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> one.
>
>
> Yuval Greenfield
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Fuzzyman-2


On 13 December 2011 14:36, David Goodger <[hidden email]> wrote:
Sorry, I have no idea what this message is about.
Some context/explanation please?
What action are you asking for?


docutils supports Python 3 (according to the project website), but does not use the Python 3 trove classifier on PyPI. That means it incorrectly shows up as not supporting Python 3 on the "wall of shame" website.


All the best,

Michael Foord

 

Note that Lea Wiemann is no longer active in the Docutils project.

-- David Goodger

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:24, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the utility
>>> > of
>>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in
>>> > mind,
>>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
>>> > author intends to port to python3.
>>>
>>
>> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>>
>> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
>> not using the trove classifier.
>>
>
> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> skew the percentage.
>
> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
>
> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> ([hidden email]) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> one.
>
>
> Yuval Greenfield



--
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


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Toshio Kuratomi-2
In reply to this post by David Goodger
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:36:29AM -0500, David Goodger wrote:
> Sorry, I have no idea what this message is about.
> Some context/explanation please?
> What action are you asking for?
>
> Note that Lea Wiemann is no longer active in the Docutils project.
>
I think Yuval is asking that the pypi page for docutils be updated to have::

  Programming Language :: Python :: 3

as well as::

  Programming Language :: Python :: 2

I'm not sure if that's right, though -- I just checked the docutils page and
it has ::

  Programming Language :: Python

which seems to be a valid method of marking a module as belonging to
multiple sub-categories.

(This thread has some other ideas as well, but those don't directly impact
docutils)

-Toshio

> -- David Goodger
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:24, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> >>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited.  Isn't the utility
> >>> > of
> >>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
> >>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version?  With that in
> >>> > mind,
> >>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
> >>> > author intends to port to python3.
> >>>
> >>
> >> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
> >>
> >> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
> >> not using the trove classifier.
> >>
> >
> > My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> > equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> > as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> > skew the percentage.
> >
> > Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> > equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> > to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
> >
> > Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> > ([hidden email]) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> > classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> > one.
> >
> >
> > Yuval Greenfield
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig

_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig

attachment0 (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Carl Meyer-4
In reply to this post by Yuval Greenfield
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/13/2011 06:50 AM, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
> I'm not sure this is the case, but easy_install/pip should check if
> the package is python 3 compatible or not before installing.

Pip does not check the trove classifiers - I'm not aware of any other
way to check for Python version support.

I'm not sure that it would be a good idea for pip to start checking
trove classifiers - too many packages just don't use them, or haven't
updated them correctly. I guess it could be an overridable warning,
perhaps. And I suppose that would encourage people to start setting them
correctly...

Carl
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk7nkIcACgkQ8W4rlRKtE2f7EwCglViVM1gDFHqnKMHg+/3n8dYI
rvIAn0fP22eEC7vGsbGvlmoqppBrlFOI
=HrZI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Chris McDonough
In reply to this post by Yuval Greenfield
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:

> 1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
> the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
> following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
> will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
> lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
> it'll help the PR issue.

For the record, at least one package is already using the new "2-only"
classifier now:

http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Pylons/1.0.1rc1



_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Terry Reedy
In reply to this post by Yuval Greenfield
On 12/13/2011 5:29 AM, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
> Hi catalog-sig, I'm the wall of shame guy,

> And I hope I'm not considered the bad guy here. Please do contact me
> with any questions or suggestions. I only want to promote python 3
> though I know the site has a dual edge to its sword.

I promote Python 3 also, but I would have called such a site something
like python3progress. I would make the second sentence something
"The packages listed in [green] are those known to work with Python 3 or
have an equivalent that does." Also, list the equivalents somehow.

Please change the page, if not the url. I am really sure that doing so
will promote Python 3 better than the current page.

--
Terry Jan Reedy

_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Chris McDonough
In reply to this post by Yuval Greenfield
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:

> 2. A more useful classifier (in terms of PR) could be "Programming
> Language :: Python :: 2 :: Py3k equivalent exists". Which would denote
> that I can entirely remove the red package from the wall. This is
> currently done manually for the following: 'multiprocessing',
> 'simplejson', 'argparse', 'uuid', 'setuptools', 'Jinja'. So feel free
> to tell me if there are more I should add to this list.

"zc.buildout" is actually Python 3.2 compatible now, FWIW.  Its 2.X
release line is 3.X compatible but the author doesn't want that to be
the default version pulled down yet, so he has "egg-only" releases of it
on PyPI which prevents easy_install/pip from treating it as "most
recent" for users of Python 3.  However, if you use Python 3, and ask
for it, you indeed get a Python 3 compat version,

- C


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Yuval Greenfield
In reply to this post by Chris McDonough
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Chris McDonough <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:

> 1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
> the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
> following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
> will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
> lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
> it'll help the PR issue.

For the record, at least one package is already using the new "2-only"
classifier now:

http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Pylons/1.0.1rc1





I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...

Please do critique:



Yuval Greenfield


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 03:53 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Chris McDonough <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>         On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
>        
>         > 1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to
>         packages with
>         > the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier
>         with the
>         > following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have
>         declared it
>         > will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This
>         might
>         > lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I
>         don't think
>         > it'll help the PR issue.
>        
>        
>         For the record, at least one package is already using the new
>         "2-only"
>         classifier now:
>        
>         http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Pylons/1.0.1rc1
>        
>        
>        
>
>
>
> I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
> longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
>
>
> Please do critique:
>
>
> http://python3wos.appspot.com/

Thanks for adding the feature.  The way you've decided to do it, I guess
folks can't really opt out of the "shame of being red" by using a python
2 only tag.  Also, given the composition of packages on there, that
chart will be all-red more or less forever; there's unlikely to be many
newly charting python 3-compat packages any time soon, at least none
that overtake the "will always be red" ones which have been around for 8
+ years.  Lame.

- C



_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Stefan Krah-2
[Not replying to Chris, I don't have the previous mail]

Chris McDonough <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
> > longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
> >
> >
> > Please do critique:
> >
> >
> > http://python3wos.appspot.com/

I don't think this site is very useful in its current form. I immediately
found two false positives:

1) ordereddict is part of:

http://docs.python.org/dev/library/collections.html#collections.OrderedDict


2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):

"2to3 is integrated into the distutils installation process and will be run as a
 build step when invoked by the python3 interpreter:

  NO_SETUPTOOLS=1 python3 setup.py install --no-compile"


Also, the site would look a lot greener if there were just two rows for
all zope.* and plone.* packages.


Stefan Krah


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Terry Reedy
On 12/16/2011 2:13 PM, Stefan Krah wrote:

>>> Please do critique:
>>> http://python3wos.appspot.com/
>
> I don't think this site is very useful in its current form.

I think in its current form it is a net negative. From time to time,
Python 2 package developers have shown up on pydev list and expressed
their resentment at being 'pressured' to convert yesterday. It makes it
hard to have a conversation.

I always wondered what they were talking about. Core developers have
mostly tried to avoid resentment-inducing pressure. At least now I know
one source of the blowback, even if it is misdirected.

--
Terry Jan Reedy

_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Yuval Greenfield
In reply to this post by Stefan Krah-2
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Stefan Krah <[hidden email]> wrote:
[Not replying to Chris, I don't have the previous mail]

Chris McDonough <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
> > longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
> >
> >
> > Please do critique:
> >
> >
> > http://python3wos.appspot.com/

I don't think this site is very useful in its current form. I immediately
found two false positives:

1) ordereddict is part of:

http://docs.python.org/dev/library/collections.html#collections.OrderedDict


2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):

"2to3 is integrated into the distutils installation process and will be run as a
 build step when invoked by the python3 interpreter:

 NO_SETUPTOOLS=1 python3 setup.py install --no-compile"


Also, the site would look a lot greener if there were just two rows for
all zope.* and plone.* packages.


Stefan Krah


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig



1) Fixed.
2) This is the same issue as with docutils. I believe that either a maintainer of PyPI needs to add the trove classifier for them or someone should contact Logilab and ask them to add the trove classifier.
3) Why is it that plone and zope have 81 packages on PyPI? In the next top 100 there are 7 green packages (cssutils, argparse, pytest, pyramid, versiontools, PyYAML, scipy). So if I consolidate plone and zope we get to about 59/200 vs 52/200. Not a huge jump but a worthwhile one.


Yuval Greenfield

_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

Stefan Krah-2
Yuval Greenfield <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Stefan Krah <[hidden email]>
>     1) ordereddict is part of:
>     2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):
>
> 1) Fixed.
> 2) This is the same issue as with docutils. I believe that either a maintainer
> of PyPI needs to add the trove classifier for them or someone should contact
> Logilab and ask them to add the trove classifier.

The persons who are running PyPI should only edit individual pages in
exceptional situations (illegal content etc.).


I was under the impression that you want to to promote Python3 adoption.
Why don't you contact Logilab and check the rest of the packages manually?


> 3) Why is it that plone and zope have 81 packages on PyPI?

I don't think it is the top priority of PyPI to facilitate generating
automated statistics. Also, anyone can upload a package without any
editorial process.


> In the next top 100 > there are 7 green packages
> (cssutils, argparse, pytest, pyramid, versiontools, PyYAML, scipy). So if I
> consolidate plone and zope we get to about 59/200 vs 52/200. Not a huge jump
> but a worthwhile one.

I don't know enough about the organization of the zope.* hierarchy. Perhaps
some people want to see that e.g. zope.interface is green.

On the whole, I believe that users of zope and plone are already acutely
aware if/when Python3 compatibility will happen. For the rest of Python
users, it would be far more interesting to see a wider variety of
packages.


Regarding the lock icon on a red background: Authors who use the
Python::2::Only tag want to be left alone. It is completely beyond
me why someone who once made a package freely available should
have a moral obligation to follow language changes forever.

What are you going to do in 10 years? Leave the Pylons entry with
a lock icon? How about maintaining a "wall of shame" for free
packages written in K&R C or free packages written in FORTRAN 77?


If an author has decided to use the classifier, he already accepts
that his package might get less attention in the future. This isn't
an easy decision, so please respect the intent of the classifier and
remove such packages from your site.


Stefan Krah


_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "python 2 only" classifier

"Martin v. Löwis"
> The persons who are running PyPI should only edit individual pages in
> exceptional situations (illegal content etc.).

Indeed. People frequently request that we change meta-data about
packages (in particular broken URLs); we always point them to the
package authors.

Regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
12