From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Roche Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: plan for emacs python tooling (esp python.el, python-mode.el)? Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:47:53 -0400 Message-ID: <87sk81cz0m.fsf@pobox.com> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Tom Roche NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1268675596 17352 80.91.229.12 (15 Mar 2010 17:53:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:53:16 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 15 18:53:10 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrETV-0007PA-J5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:53:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41886 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrETU-0007pW-Kg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:53:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NrDSS-0003uv-6U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:48:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58771 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NrDSQ-0003uS-Mt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:47:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrDSO-0007I4-Nh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:47:58 -0400 Original-Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:61192 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NrDSO-0007Hv-Kn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:47:56 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE118953D7; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:47:55 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to :subject:reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=s3hrQoKIwcJp3VFnIizq2cc9l jE=; b=rSFXZx+NP7ep5jg80SqToaWfuN3357+deaIARbQQNGklsUB8Pgm+vitrs qsT6ahf9E/dJS+brScYALWWisTWg6GVXuzuopfiEC13tUcQBUnUOS7eGRY6rLJAb Byo1bI4K0Bsn2WeNl6K2hxhnVMGX3cJ/ZOQIgihsorP1B+hugY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:subject :reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=bvqNIznbY32XwOdb0e6 /dh5GmM8l+IvsoA2+QbFlnH02vG3StO6NBAr1Y6xt9+6dBNyFu/FEJVHretrrXyc 2fOMP7n3dsKwKBCtO/vWnDYYEMKuP9AMGY0YYq15UEke28cgmTqTzcN+9VEeIxMb glqGwx8OpgF7OM/1kFXLdIFo= Original-Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE39953D6; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:47:54 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from tlrPanP5.pobox.com (unknown [69.134.240.67]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 61506953D4; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:47:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 80ADAA5A-3052-11DF-A4C1-68E3016DD5F0-07218935!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:50:14 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:122015 Archived-At: summary: Is the near-term plan for GNU emacs (e.g. for 2010-2011) to ship with python.el, python-mode.el, both, or something completely different? details: Please note I am not seeking to send or receive flame regarding the various tools, only to get something like "the opinion of the emacs developers": will emacs in the near future (i.e. 2010-2011) provide python.el, python-mode.el, both, or something completely different? I am a long-time (though not expert) GNU Emacs user who has started to code python more intensively, and would therefore prefer an optimal python development environment for emacs. Unfortunately there appears to be no PDEE =C3=A0 la the JDEE, and not even a consensus mode (as was cperl-mode when I coded perl ~y2k). Thus I need to decide whether to base my emacs configuration efforts on python.el or python-mode.el. (Preferably not both, given limited emacs configuration time.) I would prefer emacs python tooling that * integrates most easily with other emacs metatools (e.g. CEDET) * ships by default with GNU emacs. (and would like for those sets to be identical :-) I would therefore like to know what is/are * the preferences among {GNU emacs users, python developers} * the plans of the emacs development community (to the extent they are unitary) regarding emacs python tooling.=20 I sought to determine this myself via some research (which could be wrong--your comments and corrections are appreciated) over the weekend, but found neither explicit plan(s) regarding, nor consensus on the merits of, python.el vs python-mode.el. What I (apparently) found is: 0 Currently python.el is distributed with emacs releases, python-mode.el is distributed with python releases. 1 python.el remains alone in the current emacs sources: https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/emacs > you can browse the source repository or access it via bzr with > bzr branch http://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/r/emacs/trunk me@it:~$ sudo aptitude install bzr me@it:~$ D=3D/tmp/emacs-bzr ; mkdir -p $D ; pushd $D me@it:/tmp/emacs-bzr$ date ; bzr branch http://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/r/emacs= /trunk > Mon Mar 15 10:45:07 EDT 2010 ... > Branched 99665 revision(s). me@it:/tmp/emacs-bzr$ date ; find -type f | fgrep -ie 'python' > Mon Mar 15 11:35:11 EDT 2010 > ./trunk/lisp/cedet/semantic/wisent/python.el > ./trunk/lisp/cedet/semantic/wisent/python-wy.el > ./trunk/lisp/progmodes/python.el me@it:/tmp/emacs-bzr$ head trunk/lisp/cedet/semantic/wisent/python-wy.el > ;;; semantic/wisent/python-wy.el --- Generated parser support file ... me@it:/tmp/emacs-bzr$ diff -u trunk/lisp/cedet/semantic/wisent/python.el tr= unk/lisp/progmodes/python.el ... -;; Parser support for Python. +;; Major mode for editing Python, with support for inferior processes. ... 2 There was a long discussion on emacs-devel last year (Jan-Feb 2009) regarding switching from python.el to python-mode.el, but there was apparently neither definitive conclusion nor subsequent discussion. 3 Stefan Monnier (one of the main emacs maintainers) has expressed a conditional preference for python-mode.el: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2009-02/msg00113.html > all the Python coders I know install python-mode.el rather than use > python.el. I don't know if it's representative, but if that's the > case, then our users would be better served with python-mode.el 4 There has been much discussion on the python-mode list http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode since Feb 2009 regarding the switch, but no announcements regarding the underlying copyright assignment issues. 5 The python-mode.el development community seems to be larger and better organized, or at least their maillist is public. 6 The python.el development community appears to be Dave Love. That being said, python.el seems to have python 3 support already, which python-mode.el seems to lack. 7 Web searches I have made for various combinations of terms=3D{emacs, python, development} seems to show some preference among GNU emacs users for using python.el, and for basing integrations with other tools (e.g. CEDET) on python.el. Feel free to reply off- or on-list, and to forward. TIA, Tom Roche