[Bf-committers] Moving to Python 3.2.x

Diego B bdiego at gmail.com
Wed Mar 9 05:12:44 CET 2011


Let be a little clear here, we are not talking about support 2, 3,
4... N versions of python at the same time, we talk about
have a little of consideration before the update.

I am not again update to 3.2, 3.3 or 5.5, but yes about update to a
new version with only 2/3 week just because we want, of course if
is a major fix in the library (like Matt say) and we need the update
because some really bad bug, is fine, but at this point I don't see
real bug/problem/motive to do the update (or at least not in the ML,
and if I am missing some email, please let me know!).

So.... my point is: Don't take into account how often python do a new
release... the thing is when Blender need to move to a new version.
(and with this I don't say stick to one version the rest of our lives...).

If we can wait a couple of month until the new version (in this case
3.2) go into the stable branch of the major dist. (Ubuntu, Debian,
Fedora, etc) will be great,
and if we need update because a nasty bug is ok too.

So.. this thread is really long and at this point is really non-sense,
the update is done and we need to work around a solution, so focus on
that now
and take a little more of care the next time we have a new python version ;)

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Richard Shaw <hobbes1069 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We can upgrade python without causing too much inconvenience just be
>>> ensuring we document how to install the latest python.
>>> I thought that documenting how to build python would be enough, but it
>>> seems us bearded linux geeks who like to compile blender from source
>>> are for some reason not ok about building python.
>>> ok, we can include instructions for getting python testing packages too.
>> I'm only speaking for myself (though I *think* Dave P. would agree with me)...
>> The problem is not that I'm personally against compiling python for my
>> own use. The problem is that I'm trying to create and maintain a
>> distributable package for a specific linux distribution that does not
>> ***and will not have*** python 3.2 available to normal users who don't
>> compile things for themselves.
>> I am not saying that there were not good reasons for going to 3.2, I
>> just wanted to clarify, at least for myself, why it's a problem.
>> Respectfully,
>> Richard M. Shaw
> blender.org only supports official builds which are generally self
> contained builds with static libs.
> package builds use different flags, have patches applied and in the
> past at least we didn't support these, not sure if this still applies.
> eg: Gentoo package used to enable the YESIAMSTUPID define for
> unsupported 64bit linux :)
> Package maintainers could build with python 3.2, enable
> WITH_PYTHON_INSTALL & voila the package will contain python 3.2 too.
> Of-course this is not the gnu/debian way which prefers shared libs
> where-ever possible.
> Debian even discussed dropping blender because of this:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00088.html
> Not an excuse to make it hard for package maintainers, just to put
> this in context that blender has been doing things `not the linux way`
> for a while now.
> Only supporting a single version of python IMHO is important to reduce
> overhead with a small developer team,
> for a while I was making sure python 2.6, 3.0, 3.1 all worked but it
> just took time.
> Granted py3.1-3.2 is nowhere near the same amount of API changes and
> I'm ok to support both for some transitional period but not
> continuously - we did this with blender 2.4x - py2.3/4/5, where we got
> irritating breakages because of version incompatibilities, I had to
> have all python versions installed and remember what features were
> available in 2.3x so as not to use.
> My impression is that if we only support 1 python version there will
> always be Linux distros that are behind or ahead whatever python we
> choose wont be supported.

Yes, but two weeks is not a good argument ;)

> Ofcourse we can hold back on upgrading at all as Matt suggests but
> then its frustrating not to be able to use an updated python with
> fixes on other OS's just because of Linux (which make up some small %
> of blenders userbase, Ton has numbers)

As I say, if the fixes is really important and we need, is ok, but be
clear about the problem, that is all what I ask.


and comment like this don't make any good to the community and always
bring problem, so please, avoid numbers, the only
thing that we need here is to be clear about the problem and the
reason of the update, nothing more :)

> For some background info this is the original thread about bundling python.
> http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2008-December/022277.html
> Since blender is not stable yet, I think its reasonable to target
> Fedora 15 & Ubuntu (Natty) which will have py3.2.

Yes, but blender is in the "final path to an official stable release",
maybe is good keep the thing workings and not "up to day" :)

> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

People always have different points of view.. and we can't make all happy..
I know that you work a lot on this and is really great, so don't take
this bad, keep the hard work! :)

- Diego

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list