FYI: I've been intending to migrate our CI from Travis to Circle, which
may play into the timing of this; however I'll likely only allow that to
block the merge if the Travis env is broken and needs nontrivial fixes
(as it seems a waste to spend more time on Travis if I am planning to
leave). I am /hoping/ to look at that this week.
Thanks,
Jeff
On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 12:32 PM Mathias Ertl <mati@er.tl
<mailto:mati@er.tl>> wrote:
Hi Jeff + mailing list,
This thread unfortunately did not have a follow up that I can see, so
whats up with making Fabric 1.x Py3 compatible?
If I get a statement from you that you're willing to merge PRs that
start with py3 compatibility, I'm willing to start working on this, or
of course maybe za3k wants to work with this, I'm willing to help him
get started (I have ported many older Py2 projects to py3 at my old
job).
Mat
On 5/27/20 5:50 PM, Jeff Forcier wrote:
> Hi all, and thanks for putting this together, Zachary.
>
> Just to chip in with my own context:
>
> - I'd been pondering making this connection myself lately (due to
the
> delays in getting Fabric 2 to parity and now Python 2's official
EOL). Hi!
> - Fabric 1.15 was IIRC a single small feature-add, so if there
are no
> big changes on the fork besides just the Python 3 compatibility,
> unifying them should still be relatively easy, mechanically speaking.
> - As stated earlier on the list, my main concern with the Py3
compat is
> that Fabric 1's test suite doesn't have as high a % coverage as
I'd like
> (one of many impetuses for v2) but at this point I'm guessing
fabric3's
> usage has been widespread enough, for long enough, that any
serious bugs
> have already been found.
> - Curious what, if any, you ran into though - Paramiko went
through
> quite a lot of instability in its own Py3 journey...
> - Re: the fabric3 name on pip - no rush on figuring that out, for
> multiple reasons.
> - At the VERY least we would need to wait til stats show most
users
> of fabric3 had migrated to either post-merge fabric1, or fabric2.
Not in
> a rush to pull the rug out from under anyone.
> - I'm hoping that Fabric 3.x, 4.x etc will be non full
rewrites and
> thus there will be no need for in place side by side upgrades -
which
> was the only real reason to even need a 'fabric2' on pypi (and,
thus,
> ever a mainstream 'fabric3')
> - By the time we get there I'd mostly be concerned about user
> confusion (intending to get 'fabric==3.x' but installing 'fabric3'
> instead) but that is likely a ways off!
>
> Best,
> Jeff
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 6:02 PM <za3k@za3k.com
<mailto:za3k@za3k.com> <mailto:za3k@za3k.com <mailto:za3k@za3k.com>>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi / tag Matthias! I've been talking to the fabric mailing
list (cc'd)
> and the fabric developer bitprophet (cc'd). The subject is adding
> python3 support to fabric 1.x (even though 2.x is the latest) as
> part of
> making an official package.
>
> bitprophet, the current state is that this is forked off
1.14.0, only
> one version behind the latest, and I see no feature additions or
> changes. It's been marked DEPRECATED for a year because 2.x added
> python3 support.
>
> mathiasertl, I'd like to merge your fabric3 work into fabric. No
> issues,
> right?
>
> Also, bitprophet has mentioned that might be helpful there
wasn't a
> pre-existing 'fabric3' pip package out of his control, in case of
> future
> difficulty/confusion with a fabric 3.0 release--I'll leave
ya'll to
> talk
> that out.
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Forcier
> Unix sysadmin; Python engineer
> http://bitprophet.org
--
Jeff Forcier
Unix sysadmin; Python engineer
http://bitprophet.org