Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:31:18 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: python@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251019] [NEW PORT] lang/tauthon: Backwards-compatible fork of Python 2.7 interpreter with Python 3.x features Message-ID: <bug-251019-21822-WnAMF27yVh@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-251019-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-251019-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251019 Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |python@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #9 from Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org> --- I don't have strong opinions either way but am slightly inclined to keep tauthon.mk separate from Python.=20 My thinking is the majority of important packages should have switched to Python 3.x now, and for these, we don't need tauthon.for those, and we shou= ld not care. For packages where the upstream maintainers made a clear decision not to po= rt to Python 3.x (Mailman 2.x for instance, where 3.x is a rewrite-from-scratch with all lost features and other idiosyncrasies that entails), tauthon is an option, and there a switch to a USES=3Dtauthon would not really hurt. I am not familiar with Python porting to FreeBSD, so perhaps adding python@= to Cc: brings some people in that can help with making the decision on my questions above in comment #7, https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251019#c7 --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-251019-21822-WnAMF27yVh>