Re: python2-traceback2, python2-linecache2

[Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1747 bytes --]

Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
>> The traceback2 module works on python3 as well. I don't think patching
>> imports will be necessary?
>
> Maybe it works. However, I think it's silly to package a "traceback"
> module for Python 3.5 which is a backport of the "traceback" module
> included in the CPython 3.5 interpreter when we use the CPython 3.5
> interpreter in the first place.

There are other modules extracted from python3 and packaged for
python2+3. "enum34", "contextlib2", etc. AFAICT traceback was added
already in 3.0: https://docs.python.org/3.0/library/traceback.html

> Same for python-linecache2.
>
> Therefore, I would have another patchset which adds them for Python 2
> only and patches them out otherwise (s/traceback2/traceback/g).

If a module written for python3 imports "traceback2", that won't work
anyway with the standard library since it's called just "traceback". I
would much rather package a "superfluous" module, instead of
conditionally patching packages to use the built-in for python3 only.

> Adding them for Python 3.5 would just be asking for them to become
> outdated for no reason (they are part of Python 3.5 and will update
> with it - their origin is Python 3.5).
>
> That said, I'm happy that this is being discussed - I'm not sure what
> the right way to go forward is.

Me neither :-) but it's obviously something we need to tackle
eventually. Copied in Hartmut, maybe he's got some insight?

>>But I see we don't currently have traceback2, so I'm fine with 1.4.0
>>for now just to avoid packaging it. The rest LGTM, let's get this
>>[python-testtools] in!
>
> OK!

...and the rest of this series ;-)

I wonder if we should update scipy and numpy while at it. Thoughts?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]