[Bf-committers] Bf-committers Digest, Vol 53, Issue 8

[Bob Holcomb]

If going to python 3 is going to break scripts, and that's ok, would  
switching to lua be a consideration?

Cheers,

Bob

--
Sent from my mobile device

On Dec 5, 2008, at 12:09 PM, bf-committers-request at blender.org wrote:

> Send Bf-committers mailing list submissions to
>    bf-committers at blender.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    bf-committers-request at blender.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    bf-committers-owner at blender.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Bf-committers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Roland Hess)
>   2. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Campbell Barton)
>   3. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Campbell Barton)
>   4. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Brecht Van Lommel)
>   5. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Martin Poirier)
>   6. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Timothy Baldridge)
>   7. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Chris Want)
>   8. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Ken Hughes)
>   9. Re: Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5 (Timothy Baldridge)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:46:49 -0500
> From: Roland Hess <rolandh at reed-witting.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: bf-committers at blender.org
> Message-ID: <493922B9.9030007 at reed-witting.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Would the current python stick around as well for backward
> compatibility? I'd read that Py 3.0 wasn't backward compatible in a
> number of ways:
>
> http://docs.python.org/dev/3.0/whatsnew/3.0.html
>
> There is a converter available for that takes care of things like the
> "print" statement, but I think changes like the ones noted in that doc
> would break almost every existing script. While that's not a problem  
> for
> me personally, that would be a serious frustration for people who  
> search
> for a script, find it and have it not work. Not saying Blender 2.5
> shouldn't go with Python 3.0, just that I'm surprised this wasn't  
> noted
> on the "Cons" part of the proposal. This is a significant change, much
> more than Py2.3->Py2.4->Py2.5.
>
> -- 
> Roland Hess
> harkyman
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 00:41:20 +1100
> From: "Campbell Barton" <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: "bf-blender developers" <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Message-ID:
>    <7c1ab96d0812050541u4f3bdc26m3053873848170fb0 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 11:46 PM, Roland Hess <rolandh at reed- 
> witting.com> wrote:
>> Would the current python stick around as well for backward
>> compatibility? I'd read that Py 3.0 wasn't backward compatible in a
>> number of ways:
>>
>> http://docs.python.org/dev/3.0/whatsnew/3.0.html
>>
>> There is a converter available for that takes care of things like the
>> "print" statement, but I think changes like the ones noted in that  
>> doc
>> would break almost every existing script. While that's not a  
>> problem for
>> me personally, that would be a serious frustration for people who  
>> search
>> for a script, find it and have it not work. Not saying Blender 2.5
>> shouldn't go with Python 3.0, just that I'm surprised this wasn't  
>> noted
>> on the "Cons" part of the proposal. This is a significant change,  
>> much
>> more than Py2.3->Py2.4->Py2.5.
>>
>> --
>> Roland Hess
>> harkyman
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
>
> Its highly likely many/most? scripts will need to be modified to run
> in Blender2.5 - so having to do edits for py3 is minimal effort if
> your already updating your script for a new/modified api.
> It is a con, but comparatively not a huge one IMHO. especially if you
> consider we will move to py3 at some point anyway.
>
> The proposals are in 2 parts, I only had pros/cons for including
> python with blender.
>
> I cross posted on blenderartist, where some scripters have replied.
> http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=142544
>
> -- 
> - Campbell
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 01:12:50 +1100
> From: "Campbell Barton" <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: "bf-blender developers" <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Message-ID:
>    <7c1ab96d0812050612r2b4a7eaaw3c598e7672e18dce at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> To clarify...
> Including python with blender wont exclude system python modules
> (PyGame/Numpy/PIL etc), Its just those modules will need to be built
> with the same python as blender is. so blender can load them.
>
> Basically - Do what we are doing on win32 on other OS's, and include
> more modules so scripts dont complain for a full python install.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:51:46 +0100
> From: Brecht Van Lommel <brecht at blender.org>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Message-ID: <49394002.30802 at blender.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
>> Campbell Barton wrote:
>>> Hey All, this proposal covers 2 topics
>>> * Distribute Blender with python on all OS's (I'd suggest this
>>> irrespective of py version used)
>>> * Move to Python 3.0 for blender 2.5 (relies on a bundling python)
>
> I think some sort of painful transition is inevitable. Python 3.0 will
> inevitably break most scripts, just grep for "print" in
> release/scripts and see how often it is used, and there are many more
> incompatibilities, external scripts are probably no different.
>
> On the other hand 2.5 is going to break the Draw module. For example
> Draw.PupMenu is blocking, but this is not allowed in 2.50. Again more
> than half of the scripts in release/scripts use that, so they will
> break even if we try to preserve the 2.4x api.
>
> I think we might as well get it over with in one go.
>
> Further, I do not really understand the objection to bundling python
> with Blender. If Blender is compiled with the same version as is
> installed on the operating system, external modules using that version
> will still be available.
>
> If you are distributing a script with external modules you can
> distribute them with the script even and it's easier because you know
> the python version Blender uses. If this is for some custom script for
> your own purposes I'm sure you are capable of compiling either Blender
> or the external module so they use the same python version, if the
> version is not the same already. Right now even, chances are there is
> no Blender release with the python version you are using.
>
> So, basically I agree with Campbell in that we should bundle 2.5 with
> python 3.0, I don't see what would be the better alternative that is
> feasible, as I don't think having two python versions compiled into
> Blender is a practical possibility.
>
> Brecht.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 07:49:44 -0800 (PST)
> From: Martin Poirier <theeth at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Message-ID: <289590.76304.qm at web51303.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>
>
> --- On Fri, 12/5/08, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Its highly likely many/most? scripts will need to be
>> modified to run
>> in Blender2.5 - so having to do edits for py3 is minimal
>> effort if
>> your already updating your script for a new/modified api.
>> It is a con, but comparatively not a huge one IMHO.
>> especially if you
>> consider we will move to py3 at some point anyway.
>
> True, but I really don't think that point should be now (as in this  
> very moment). For one thing, Py3K is just out of the door, as you  
> said yourself in the BA thread, the first version of a rewrite is  
> often not the most stable. ;)
>
> 2.50 is not going to be released any time soon and you said  
> switching to Py3K means very little changes internally, so no need  
> to rush that decision (at least not until the design of the API is  
> fixed)
>
> Regarding bundling, going over the *pro* list:
>
> * We can include modules bundled scripts use so that users are not
> faced with error messages when they try a python tool.
>
> I guess that's a fix for users not reading the download page  
> properly? (or the page not being precise enough about external  
> dependency on Python)
>
> If it's a problem with bundled script not having correct failsafe,  
> then that's different altogether.
>
> * No need to distribute blender for versions py 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6....
> and later 3.0 - We already are having to do both 32 and 64bit Blender
> builds. Many users wont know what python version is installed on  
> their system.
>
> We currently only have builds with 2.4 and 2.5 on the download page  
> (or py 2.3 for os X, but they don't have 2.4 builds), so I don't  
> quite see where you got your list. Moreover, if we decide to move to  
> 3K, there's no way in hell that we'll be maintaining two sets of  
> bundled script for backward compatibilities, so we can drop all 2.X  
> versions then.
>
> Heck, we could stick to a single version too, regardless of bundling.
>
> * A reliable python means we can use it for more important aspects  
> of Blender 2.5 (something Ton has suggested)
>
> That, IMHO, should be the biggest argument.
>
> * No conflicts with the system python - there have been bug reports
> where the system python was crashing blender.
>
> The one I remember (there might have been others mind you) was  
> caused by a faulty compile (of Python or Blender, it wasn't clear)  
> and couldn't be reproduced on other systems using the same distro.
>
> * Blender already includes FFMpeg and some other significant libs on
> most OS's
>
> Comparing to ffmpeg is a bit loaded, their API is about as stable as  
> a pile of rumble and they don't have released versions we can  
> reliably link against (or did they finally bit that bullet?)
>
> * Openoffice and some games include python, searched for python
> problems with these apps and didnt find complaints, common with
> Blender.
>
> If you were thinking of EVE, they include Stackless Python, hardly  
> comparable (moreover, we already bundle on windows).
>
> The most frequent "complain" about Blender's Python is the site- 
> package missing warning, if they disable import of external package,  
> of course they wouldn't see that.
>
> I have a couple of technical questions though. By bundling the  
> interpreter and some libs but still leaving the possibility of  
> importing external libs, won't this also leave us open to the same  
> site-package incompatibilities/missing warning message that we  
> currently have and that you seem to identify as "the big problem  
> with not bundling python"? I mean, we already bundle Python on  
> windows and most of the reports are on that OS, so how is that a fix?
>
> I find the long list of BA threads somewhat disingenuous (have you  
> even read them before posting?) as lots of them wouldn't be fixed  
> with bundling Python (permission problem on Vista, wrong libc  
> version, how to run multiple versions of blender, exception in a  
> script at runtime, ...), but I digress.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 09:59:07 -0600
> From: "Timothy Baldridge" <tbaldridge at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: "bf-blender developers" <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Message-ID:
>    <b33fdb110812050759w590ecf1p981d5bda737ed7a6 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>> * Openoffice and some games include python, searched for python
>> problems with these apps and didnt find complaints, common with
>> Blender.
>
> True, but the installs for most of these games stay constant, you're
> not removing and adding modules on a regular basis. If we do bundle
> Pythonr we should always check for a system Python first, as auto
> installers won't know about the Blender Python. Or perhaps we've
> solved this issue already?
>
> If a user installs numpy into the system directory, does Blender see  
> it?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:25:10 -0700
> From: Chris Want <cwant at ualberta.ca>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Message-ID: <493955E6.5020706 at ualberta.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
> Reading this thread, I become more agreeable to the suggestion
> that Early Ehlinger made earlier (no pun intended). He suggested
> that python scripting should be handled as an external plugin
> that loads at run time. Then the problem of having builds of
> blender for different python versions doesn't matter: just
> have one blender build and distribute it with plugins for
> the different python versions. This, of course, would be a
> lot easier with a well thought out C API, which I believe should
> be the first step before tackling python (as I've mentioned
> before).
>
> I should also point out that bundling python with blender adds
> extra complexity to Blender's plethora of build systems. The
> example of FFMPEG is a poor one since not all build
> systems support it, there are issues under windowa, the
> scons system supports it by having the additional
> requirement of having autoconf installed, and I have
> recently seen mails on the list from our game engine developer
> trying to change the FFMPEG sources in extern, to which
> there are no replies from the official maintainer. This is
> not a role model to follow.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:46:38 -0800
> From: Ken Hughes <khughes at pacific.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bundle Python 3.0 for Blender 2.5
> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Message-ID: <49395AEE.2090608 at pacific.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Martin Poirier wrote:
>> 2.50 is not going to be released any time soon and you said  
>> switching to Py3K means very little changes internally, so no need  
>> to rush that decision (at least not until the design of the API is  
>> fixed)
>>