|
| From: | Jeff Forcier |
| Subject: | Re: Invoke changes? |
| Date: | Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:50:07 -0400 |
Hi, we use Invoke (mainly using Python3 but sometimes with Python2, we
found it easy to write code that worked with both) a lot, will there
be breaking changes to Invoke API?
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 12:00 PM <fab-user-request@nongnu.org> wrote:
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: fabric3 (Jeff Forcier)
> 2. Re: 'fabric1' and 'fabric2' packages (Jeff Forcier)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 15:40:28 -0400
> From: Jeff Forcier <jeff@bitprophet.org>
> To: Mathias Ertl <mati@er.tl>
> Cc: za3k@za3k.com, Fabric Mailing List <fab-user@nongnu.org>
> Subject: Re: fabric3
> Message-ID:
> <CAC+P8MQ317S4qfjY59+9udNdngA0Zzo8e1pELj9DR1bZ2su_fw@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Mathias et al,
>
> Apologies, thought I had followed up last month, but not seeing anything in
> my outbox...
>
> I am definitely willing to merge PRs that add Python 3 compatibility,
> though my assumption was that we'd do it as a single PR that approximates
> the diff between the official repo's v1 branch, and fabric3, and treat it
> in the changelog/messaging as "were you using fabric3 from PyPI? Fabric
> 1.15 is now effectively the same thing! come on back!!"
>
> Were you intending to follow some other multi-step process or are we in
> alignment here? Open to whatever, as long as there's a good rationale.
>
> 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> 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>>
> > > 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
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/fab-user/attachments/20200615/68d18f00/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 15:46:10 -0400
> From: Jeff Forcier <jeff@bitprophet.org>
> To: za3k@za3k.com
> Cc: Fabric Mailing List <fab-user@nongnu.org>
> Subject: Re: 'fabric1' and 'fabric2' packages
> Message-ID:
> <CAC+P8MSzHCfqsa_1XgD67Dc+qBgUB3MnX_ftghQA8rbiHksG1Q@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> >
> > Once a package is popular
> > enough, it will get "promoted" to the main community repo. That should
> > either never happen since there's not many fabric1 users, or happen
> > after python3 migration.
> >
> > To avoid also making python2-pytest-relaxed and python2-invoke,
> > python2-paramiko doesn't run a test suite. Unfortunate but made my life
> > easier.
> >
>
> Thanks for the updates - makes sense.
>
>
> > That's basically it for now, ping me if/when 1.x is working on Python 3?
> >
>
> Keep an eye on the list - I expect most of it to get worked out on here,
> certainly it will be announced post merge.
>
>
> > Once that's working (as long as it's in the next couple months) I'll:
> > - Update fabric1 in the AUR
> > - Delete python2-paramiko from the AUR, since nothing else is using it.
> > - Talk to the Arch Linux 'fabric' maintainer about renaming fabric ->
> > fabric2
> > - Submit a fabric1 package to Debian and talk to them about renaming
> > fabric -> fabric2
> >
>
> Seems sensible - thanks!
>
>
> > P.S. I looked at my fabfile thoroughly over the last few weeks. I have a
> > (short!) list of things blocking me from upgrading, if you would be
> > interested in specifics.
> >
>
> As long as you skim the upgrading doc (http://www.fabfile.org/upgrading.html)
> to see what's already a known issue, by all means. Feel free to send that
> to just-me if you want to avoid the noise for other folks.
>
>
> --
> Jeff Forcier
> Unix sysadmin; Python engineer
> http://bitprophet.org
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/fab-user/attachments/20200615/8559ed87/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fab-user mailing list
> Fab-user@nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fab-user
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Fab-user Digest, Vol 138, Issue 3
> ****************************************
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |