Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Python 3 for Bitbake

[akuster <akuster@mvista.com>]

On 05/05/2016 10:29 AM, Jan-Simon Möller wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 5. Mai 2016, 10:13:21 schrieb Mark Hatle:
>>>> Question, do we need any type of identifier in layers to say they're
>>>> "python3" compatible or not?
>>>
>>> Layers that are python2 will need krogoth branches. I'd expect master
>>> branches to follow oe-core/master and jump to python3.
>>
>> I don't disagree, but my experience has been that branching is late or never
>> in a lot of layers.
>>
>> This might be a place where we need to plan to go through the layer index
>> and at least see if the layer parses -- and flag things that no longer
>> parse?  (I don't even know if this is something reasonable to attempt.)
>>
>> My fear is just we've already got a lot of "broken" (without defining that)
>> layers in the index, and I think it will be worse once the python3 change
>> happens.  I'd really like to make sure we don't confuse people with various
>> errors.
>>
> 
> As it is a hard cut anyway, call it YP 3.0 (!) and start with an empty 
> layerindex for 3.0 and only add layers that parse or are maintained.
> Legacy is 1.x/2.x and will be a separate page.

That would be the lest disruptive but I fear the Python3 switch over
wont happen for a very long time. The same people doing that work would
most likely be active on or maintaining 2.x

- armin
> 
> 
> --
> Jan-Simon Möller
> dl9pf@gmx.de
>