[oe] meta-python py2 plans
ticotimo at gmail.com
Sun Jun 2 19:25:26 UTC 2019
What Ross, Paul and I are proposing (we have discussed in YPTM/Engineering
Sync,Bug Triage meetings and in person):
1. Move existing (deprecated) meta-python to a new layer
(meta-python-classic? ;) ). I will be seeking someone else to pick up the
mantel of maintenance, as I have no intent to spend time on python2.
2. Make meta-python python3 only. This gives us a chance to merge the
python3-* and python-*.inc files, for simpler maintenance.
3. Refactor recipetool/devtool to support python3 (only).
4. Investigate using distutils "test" functionality for low-hanging fruit
ptests for python3 modules (something like the ptest-perl.bbclass). We
really need ptests.
This is also an opportunity to move meta-python into it's own repository
(not under the meta-openembedded umbrella). I have no strong opinion on
this, but it has been under discussion for a couple of years now. Without
patchtest and ptests for python recipes, maintenance is challenging (not
that this is impacted by where the layer lives). I run a Jenkins job weekly
to run AUH on "all" python recipes, not that I have had a lot of time to go
the last mile to get the patches to the mailing list (there is always hand
tweaking and manual testing which is time consuming). This task would be
simpler in a separate repository, with cleaner git log. Patchtest and
patchwork would be simpler with a dedicated mailing list. The main cons to
a new repo are that (1) other layers (e.g. meta-networking) depend on
meta-python and meta-python depends on meta-oe and (2) without improved
tools maintenance, a new repo doesn't really change anything. There has
also been discussion of functional layers, rather than a "language" layer.
Meta-python has become a bit of a mini-meta-oe in that it has recieved a
lot of drive-by contributions and is a bit of everything plus the kitchen
Ultimately, I think the TSC(s) may need to make a call on moving the repo.
A clear consensus has not been achieved to date (in a series of OEDAM/OEDEM
meetings) and so we have continued with status quo.
I would like to see all of this accomplished by the 2.9 release. Anyone
interested in helping, especially with #1, #3 and #4, please speak up.
On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:20 AM akuster808 <akuster808 at gmail.com> wrote:
> With python2 being EOL this year. Is there a plan for meta-python to
> deal with this?
> - Armin
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
More information about the Openembedded-devel