From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) Subject: Python version auditing followup Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:34:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 20 15:34:54 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TlhD0-0006eW-02 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:34:50 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751324Ab2LTOed (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:34:33 -0500 Received: from static-71-162-243-5.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([71.162.243.5]:35515 "EHLO snark.thyrsus.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751116Ab2LTOeb (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:34:31 -0500 Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BEA0744105; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:34:11 -0500 (EST) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Most of the Python scripts in the distribution are small and simple to audit, so I am pretty sure of the results. The only place where I have a concern is the git_helpers library; that is somewhat more complex and I might have missed a dependency somewhere. Whoever owns that should check my finding that it should run under 2.4 That was the first of three patches I have promised. In order to do the next one, which will be a development guidelines recommend compatibility back to some specific version X, I need a policy decision. How do we set X? I don't think X can be < 2.4, nor does it need to be - 2.4 came out in 2004 and eight years is plenty of deployment time. The later we set it, the more convenient for developers. But of course by setting it late we trade away some portability to older systems. In previous discussion of this issue I recommended X = 2.6. That is still my recommendation. Thoughts, comments, objections? -- Eric S. Raymond In recent years it has been suggested that the Second Amendment protects the "collective" right of states to maintain militias, while it does not protect the right of "the people" to keep and bear arms. If anyone entertained this notion in the period during which the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were debated and ratified, it remains one of the most closely guarded secrets of the eighteenth century, for no known writing surviving from the period between 1787 and 1791 states such a thesis. -- Stephen P. Halbrook, "That Every Man Be Armed", 1984 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:30:31 -0800 Message-ID: <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 20 19:30:53 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TlktR-00034U-1W for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 19:30:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751675Ab2LTSag (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:30:36 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:32993 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750875Ab2LTSae (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:30:34 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64D0F9E21; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:30:34 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=yM6D+4Nr2PPNMJ6ep3vtz0sxsHs=; b=LPBeN4 rXH4I7onDpYwJMX5HSpuM2YyezV5E4r0hG3WikmT3Yv3thrsgvv7kEvzuJb0RDve dMHxGewviVQFnhkEpuDApxrisk2oP5VCwKA1xdsb+uZPDQaXE/RNei/M9ehtGnxD w6wpvbfHHEQ8OrHgUhcadALmb80RNGBRo9N10= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=dqLFBNf+bbeT3T+jctQyv3v0yHGmUJx1 6EYkUKrCgCkQcUXPZO7kMhEca1aAHPslDbFSnJ3sqBKV01yuj/BW4k0dITkn84jz XW+NzfX3URSCHmcoUOKAVtlq2us0t5PK3t2Cbq+/qbDHawjW7HcUqMtxVn7lA/m6 PKl1Odl74NE= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EFB69E1F; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:30:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCC8A9E1C; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:30:33 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> (Eric S. Raymond's message of "Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:34:11 -0500 (EST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 574DDCF4-4AD3-11E2-B178-F0CE2E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes: > That was the first of three patches I have promised. In order to do > the next one, which will be a development guidelines recommend > compatibility back to some specific version X, I need a policy > decision. How do we set X? > > I don't think X can be < 2.4, nor does it need to be - 2.4 came out > in 2004 and eight years is plenty of deployment time. > > The later we set it, the more convenient for developers. But of > course by setting it late we trade away some portability to > older systems. > > In previous discussion of this issue I recommended X = 2.6. > That is still my recommendation. Thoughts, comments, objections? I personally would think 2.6 is recent enough. Which platforms that are long-term-maintained by their vendors still pin their Python at 2.4.X? 2.4.6 was in 2008 that was source only, 2.4.4 was in late 2006 that was the last 2.4 with binary release. Objections? Comments? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Joachim Schmitz" Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:30:30 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 20 22:31:21 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tlni3-00039K-TG for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:20 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751592Ab2LTVbA (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:31:00 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:40123 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750983Ab2LTVbA (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:31:00 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tlnhu-0002zk-Um for git@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:10 +0100 Received: from dsdf-4db53d15.pool.mediaways.net ([77.181.61.21]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:10 +0100 Received: from jojo by dsdf-4db53d15.pool.mediaways.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:10 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dsdf-4db53d15.pool.mediaways.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes: > >> That was the first of three patches I have promised. In order to do >> the next one, which will be a development guidelines recommend >> compatibility back to some specific version X, I need a policy >> decision. How do we set X? >> >> I don't think X can be < 2.4, nor does it need to be - 2.4 came out >> in 2004 and eight years is plenty of deployment time. >> >> The later we set it, the more convenient for developers. But of >> course by setting it late we trade away some portability to >> older systems. >> >> In previous discussion of this issue I recommended X = 2.6. >> That is still my recommendation. Thoughts, comments, objections? > > I personally would think 2.6 is recent enough. Which platforms that > are long-term-maintained by their vendors still pin their Python at > 2.4.X? 2.4.6 was in 2008 that was source only, 2.4.4 was in late > 2006 that was the last 2.4 with binary release. > > Objections? Comments? We have a working 2.4.2 for HP-NonStop and some major problems getting 2.7.3 to work. Bye, Jojo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:39:17 -0800 Message-ID: <7vzk182yka.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "Joachim Schmitz" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 20 22:39:44 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tlnq6-00029v-Om for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:39:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751299Ab2LTVjV (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:39:21 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:41392 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751060Ab2LTVjU (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:39:20 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB90F9FF5; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:39:19 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=n+FEj8t2pOoY8Kka0DCoddCAb18=; b=YX4NFS 1//xHF0TW+bOYh/OjWhq6Cf+KK/2zH3rE1bgwpUT19STr6/LRQ4ZFoT/UKb/4kRd 4Nbyrj74nLVrMIUpqHJG4tz3SIxu9CObJ3i2l1wFBPmfFCukWmpSv/779jtcdDZt NmdQoLz45XWZFi3nM3RKx3iPOTznreTAbSG9E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Fof6v7XkUqts1oUtWic1NwJqYP+8Ip34 C2b+TEO49/ySaT8rKbahy7EqQfD2iwcZrtJe5tn0C2l+3PmalifQC+MXGHsR55M0 uQna/kWUG0lqS5pUt3qwblJdTSqdMqzAMhfOYxxWUDssm2IKyB3rWkJbbnvXObaG r0CDtAf99z4= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D919FF4; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:39:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27CB99FF3; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:39:19 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Joachim Schmitz's message of "Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:30:30 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B5C3216C-4AED-11E2-9594-F0CE2E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Joachim Schmitz" writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> I personally would think 2.6 is recent enough. Which platforms that >> are long-term-maintained by their vendors still pin their Python at >> 2.4.X? 2.4.6 was in 2008 that was source only, 2.4.4 was in late >> 2006 that was the last 2.4 with binary release. >> >> Objections? Comments? > > We have a working 2.4.2 for HP-NonStop and some major problems getting > 2.7.3 to work. I do not think a platform that stops at 2.4.2 instead of going to higher 2.4.X series deserves to be called "long term maintained by their vendors". It sounds more like "attempted to supply 2.4.X and abandoned the users once onee port was done" to me. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Joachim Schmitz" Subject: RE: Python version auditing followup Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:26:52 +0100 Message-ID: <000d01cddf4c$8cbf2ca0$a63d85e0$@schmitz-digital.de> References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vzk182yka.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: To: "'Junio C Hamano'" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 21 08:27:34 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tlx0w-0007sT-Sn for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:27:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750868Ab2LUH1J (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 02:27:09 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:63152 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750740Ab2LUH1G (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 02:27:06 -0500 Received: from DualCore (dsdf-4d0a157e.pool.mediaWays.net [77.10.21.126]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MgJSU-1TPTub2Taw-00NrPL; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:27:03 +0100 In-Reply-To: <7vzk182yka.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGJcJ0OStfQbsM1tIQ7oyx+MGbnCwL3z68DAeXO9zcB00FfDph2LEBg Content-Language: de X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:YuRbBGuL0xVOgkvauF8eEB39HjbNjCFppaEcHg6enVt HFzi06PVZRIqrDZK26QNFb19zvA+h0PwJkqZjihbnmofr638T0 zs5wRG3E1SYzka5XMUWCIQFI5/cm6oRVgBhxgW7BCkLfzuHM67 bMC64PkM+5HZ8HudpmCz29JE4SBAq774OSYfJFZtGUtEZ8V0ac iUBKJszX7LsDPuURDV6fbskiRJR07g9KVpvPbUFKFOQg/pFmWu 0PaUjzq9VaY7ID74lHV5d5uwFu8U5jCqWyW/sQAKqQfl2G2ltc fkSpomPlSOAF9j+5Yg3CPGm99fTOPrbPb38vpwtw4i1jc6mOwN zmFotryjd/Sj7O2RpHS+MkFB1wj3q2dUX5O4wcs0R9HUSB7zCa J2e8iX0tcEy4A== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@pobox.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:39 PM > To: Joachim Schmitz > Cc: git@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup > > "Joachim Schmitz" writes: > > > Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I personally would think 2.6 is recent enough. Which platforms that > >> are long-term-maintained by their vendors still pin their Python at > >> 2.4.X? 2.4.6 was in 2008 that was source only, 2.4.4 was in late > >> 2006 that was the last 2.4 with binary release. > >> > >> Objections? Comments? > > > > We have a working 2.4.2 for HP-NonStop and some major problems getting > > 2.7.3 to work. > > I do not think a platform that stops at 2.4.2 instead of going to > higher 2.4.X series deserves to be called "long term maintained by > their vendors". It sounds more like "attempted to supply 2.4.X and > abandoned the users once one port was done" to me. Well, not entirely wrong, but not all true at too. I guess I need to defend the vendor here: It is not really the Vendor (HP) that provided Python 2.4.2 or tries to provide 2.7.3, it is a volunteer and community effort. HP did sponsor the 2.4.2 port though (by allowing an HP employee to do the port inn his regular working hours). It is not doing this any longer (since 2007). Since then it is a small group doing this on a purely voluntary basis in their spare time (one HP employee amongst them, me). Same goes for the git port BTW. And for every other port provided on http://ituglib.connect-cummunity.org (this machine is sponsored by HP). Almost every other port, as some pretty recently made it into the officially supported O/S version, so far: Samba, bash, coreutils, vim, gzip, bzip2, Perl, PHP. Bye, Jojo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:28:29 -0800 Message-ID: <7va9t71cqa.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vzk182yka.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <000d01cddf4c$8cbf2ca0$a63d85e0$@schmitz-digital.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: To: "Joachim Schmitz" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 21 19:28:56 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tm7L1-0002wM-7A for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:28:51 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751948Ab2LUS2e (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:28:34 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:47747 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751504Ab2LUS2c (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:28:32 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E55AA5A3; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:28:32 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=wzT2jfP8nLlVHm5UBPfoUClF1ac=; b=GOnMQD N3mw73DiK9u7BS9/S8DffveNqIA9wplOq3tRX8b2L616IjSkMpYF/eOJZ8lbATKc SW3pyDukjanBIYj8TwWQsc74G1pl3xd98gIVIW3R6ndM2A03ArVIbPZFi9G96XG5 +KtSl52p3JTdx93voS2AwSOdQ9eUDC44W+rL8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=P7u2kztpM5RI9TCw4NtJMA7IVkbZaTqc Zv/PjbGoYeMezS97QxDeq9Om0im4sqZuUVFLrcYxEs63zWNZ9mXl9xvni9s6qCYD 7ns8uW4uMQIz1OQXiWsyE7BcduLU1BPX+Tw2d4gRmhByJZyv97dt8OzBvxjMgU/B csXIDF1s2/M= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F025AA5A2; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:28:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3D2F0A5A1; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:28:31 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <000d01cddf4c$8cbf2ca0$a63d85e0$@schmitz-digital.de> (Joachim Schmitz's message of "Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:26:52 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 38B00032-4B9C-11E2-B9CA-F0CE2E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Joachim Schmitz" writes: >> > We have a working 2.4.2 for HP-NonStop and some major problems getting >> > 2.7.3 to work. >> >> I do not think a platform that stops at 2.4.2 instead of going to >> higher 2.4.X series deserves to be called "long term maintained by >> their vendors". It sounds more like "attempted to supply 2.4.X and >> abandoned the users once one port was done" to me. > > Well, not entirely wrong, but not all true at too. > I guess I need to defend the vendor here: It is not really the > Vendor (HP) that provided Python 2.4.2 or tries to provide 2.7.3, > it is a volunteer and community effort. HP did sponsor the 2.4.2 > port though (by allowing an HP employee to do the port inn his > regular working hours). It is not doing this any longer (since > 2007). Since then it is a small group doing this on a purely > voluntary basis in their spare time (one HP employee amongst them, > me). Same goes for the git port BTW. For the purpose of "if we draw the line at 2.6, would it hurt many people who have been happily using the existing release of Git that was happy with 2.4", it is dubious HP-NonStop counts. It is not like the users on that platform have been happily using Python based Porcelain at the fringe of Git, and drawing the line at 2.6 will not give them any regression. It does add more things that needs to be done to the volunteer developers for that platform and the organization that may want to support the platform (as they have to finish 2.6 port if we decide to draw the line there), but that is a secondary consideration. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Joachim Schmitz" Subject: RE: Python version auditing followup Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:44:10 +0100 Message-ID: <006101cddfab$2afb0cf0$80f126d0$@schmitz-digital.de> References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vzk182yka.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <000d01cddf4c$8cbf2ca0$a63d85e0$@schmitz-digital.de> <7va9t71cqa.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: To: "'Junio C Hamano'" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 21 19:44:40 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tm7aD-0008NO-NB for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:44:34 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751989Ab2LUSoQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:44:16 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:61271 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751260Ab2LUSoO (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:44:14 -0500 Received: from DualCore (dsdf-4d0a157e.pool.mediaWays.net [77.10.21.126]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu3) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MCTBN-1Tv9z82tM1-0098VN; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:44:12 +0100 In-Reply-To: <7va9t71cqa.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGJcJ0OStfQbsM1tIQ7oyx+MGbnCwL3z68DAeXO9zcB00FfDgITTBHlAfhQa3mYVpD8UA== Content-Language: de X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:qIy95XRsUanjTJlNOEJQDZRVi3i1xjPL6Vtbx986iUM GaiJCsCHxlqJiIWEu57/DtUxfjWaGLO4U30hHiGqnWQOKNGKmf WWMX/fwnk16BsZZKJacMAyTS2L5ShQQhnkpsxMINK3pNVIwRsP if+g4eHtE9e48y66HfbJnsq/NBi8GWE3oE06lYT0iVsycNx/j6 MAtDv+X5yjfLNhrwcEMmuZ9xLYwvcDHSuskaEUsa4j9Wmzo84Y OsayFqtaYXIF83lz0idjlFFSpAWXijfpxSOS15g/DqCxCZJI4U wr3kRdiODSUxQLj9nj4aj10MZZSZRraTQAr2aO6qBGkLatvbJV bA4GgKmWSWtMM5p9oAqillFLPCKIPn5bs8VNO+F17nmH3+E0Ta pM7fB0igNDiGA== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@pobox.com] > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 7:28 PM > To: Joachim Schmitz > Cc: git@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup > > "Joachim Schmitz" writes: > > >> > We have a working 2.4.2 for HP-NonStop and some major problems getting > >> > 2.7.3 to work. > >> > >> I do not think a platform that stops at 2.4.2 instead of going to > >> higher 2.4.X series deserves to be called "long term maintained by > >> their vendors". It sounds more like "attempted to supply 2.4.X and > >> abandoned the users once one port was done" to me. > > > > Well, not entirely wrong, but not all true at too. > > I guess I need to defend the vendor here: It is not really the > > Vendor (HP) that provided Python 2.4.2 or tries to provide 2.7.3, > > it is a volunteer and community effort. HP did sponsor the 2.4.2 > > port though (by allowing an HP employee to do the port inn his > > regular working hours). It is not doing this any longer (since > > 2007). Since then it is a small group doing this on a purely > > voluntary basis in their spare time (one HP employee amongst them, > > me). Same goes for the git port BTW. > > For the purpose of "if we draw the line at 2.6, would it hurt many > people who have been happily using the existing release of Git that > was happy with 2.4", it is dubious HP-NonStop counts. It is not > like the users on that platform have been happily using Python based > Porcelain at the fringe of Git, and drawing the line at 2.6 will not > give them any regression. You asked for opions and obhections, you got mine ;-) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:48:28 -0800 Message-ID: <7vy5grz1fn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vzk182yka.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <000d01cddf4c$8cbf2ca0$a63d85e0$@schmitz-digital.de> <7va9t71cqa.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <006101cddfab$2afb0cf0$80f126d0$@schmitz-digital.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: To: "Joachim Schmitz" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 21 19:48:57 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Tm7eS-0003lj-NJ for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:48:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751827Ab2LUSsi (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:48:38 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:60940 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751293Ab2LUSsg (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:48:36 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 900F9AC86; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:48:31 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=dPrxOdIdVheWimRV3xbcre3Z/tc=; b=VEizF+ IxA/os/KcaDF1LQWl0SM8J2T/uHv5lf2nRUs4uO+ojS6IgiafpjrVLNofEjKwHw8 07OyXf0zSZbveC+JJSziKlkHwqhlNFmQzCkYWhHs0/V12PnD6X0/jpGxKl3Hm+Le ngB7Z4eazXPq7hAwQ4Zz7RBPKAm7EB6xBKTJA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=iT29GREWK8oP8dsoTmJnfA7v9uHxlPnO wnHYMdQetatOBeabldEfhFCBWqXZYU5ECSSoRwizAuGvGlxFJ9PSjAy6f96zFfPP 6CMBm9Dl/PFPhGLCShpqu0Mr3e9hA17x101M7TJEDSLX2zNYsv5awpi34uSeZzSk kBmqN1II++s= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DA62AC85; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:48:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 84D39AC83; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:48:30 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <006101cddfab$2afb0cf0$80f126d0$@schmitz-digital.de> (Joachim Schmitz's message of "Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:44:10 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 0385A634-4B9F-11E2-AF0E-F0CE2E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Joachim Schmitz" writes: >> From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@pobox.com] >> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 7:28 PM >> To: Joachim Schmitz >> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup >> >> "Joachim Schmitz" writes: >> >> >> > We have a working 2.4.2 for HP-NonStop and some major problems getting >> >> > 2.7.3 to work. >> >> >> >> I do not think a platform that stops at 2.4.2 instead of going to >> >> higher 2.4.X series deserves to be called "long term maintained by >> >> their vendors". It sounds more like "attempted to supply 2.4.X and >> >> abandoned the users once one port was done" to me. >> > >> > Well, not entirely wrong, but not all true at too. >> > I guess I need to defend the vendor here: It is not really the >> > Vendor (HP) that provided Python 2.4.2 or tries to provide 2.7.3, >> > it is a volunteer and community effort. HP did sponsor the 2.4.2 >> > port though (by allowing an HP employee to do the port inn his >> > regular working hours). It is not doing this any longer (since >> > 2007). Since then it is a small group doing this on a purely >> > voluntary basis in their spare time (one HP employee amongst them, >> > me). Same goes for the git port BTW. >> >> For the purpose of "if we draw the line at 2.6, would it hurt many >> people who have been happily using the existing release of Git that >> was happy with 2.4", it is dubious HP-NonStop counts. It is not >> like the users on that platform have been happily using Python based >> Porcelain at the fringe of Git, and drawing the line at 2.6 will not >> give them any regression. > > You asked for opions and obhections, you got mine ;-) Yeah, duly noted, and appreciated. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dennis Kaarsemaker Subject: Re: Python version auditing followup Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 22:57:12 +0100 Message-ID: <1356645432.5522.3.camel@localhost> References: <20121220143411.BEA0744105@snark.thyrsus.com> <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Eric S. Raymond" , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 27 23:19:42 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ToLnd-0000sI-Q2 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 23:19:38 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751723Ab2L0WTU (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:19:20 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com ([209.85.212.182]:42241 "EHLO mail-wi0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751532Ab2L0WTS (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:19:18 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 1322 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:19:18 EST Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id hn14so5610352wib.9 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 14:19:15 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:content-type:x-mailer:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=7CtkS/UwL/QeiWId8XLmwgkRWDIFech0q6ul7fHk0cM=; b=EiMQ/6+p+J9XTS3Wm3CTzl8dibH5An1c/ebqZUROMXdkWrUR5WhJKUvvvBF0lrUDaD LGRetkDLuswvggQfeXrlvz67YAMvtVbDvbLv2GqSCJv3gW26VqCLO8pUz3Ma4pCRxVxx ll1yV5EXeeaK2VgjF2dMbFqIZqMpdgtn2C9r7YQO/4b0jYMY4AmCcq8yTICD9MmIGpM7 ViYNYdTAByk/RzoezO+rSOxwRDR+5Cih1uYqLSCRZ3tTVm3WqnMGsy+82km/U1AefhI2 6AdTjCZXDve12CDdZdYFcVkcCU9ih/bVTarvLqpIU2yKZnXTVuNh3OOdOhg90P9Erdgz HIhw== X-Received: by 10.180.33.44 with SMTP id o12mr42698772wii.28.1356645435504; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:57:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.42.1.4] (82-168-11-8.ip.telfort.nl. [82.168.11.8]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bd7sm51382651wib.8.2012.12.27.13.57.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:57:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7vobho60fs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.0-0ubuntu3 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQljzU5EoxlYCoQoBM99Rj/N+F6WeZYVJ5SYosdX6wNcco1OrN7Lnbe72IIq8hcwe1ULogAj Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On do, 2012-12-20 at 10:30 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Which platforms that are long-term-maintained by their vendors still > pin their Python at 2.4.X? RHEL 5.x and its clones still use python 2.4. It is supported by red hat until at least 2017 (though end of production phase two, Q1 2014, seems like a reasonable cut-off point). -- Dennis Kaarsemaker