Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Clicking around, those that don't seem to be:

1. Obsolete. Either explicitly so (e.g. Google API) or abandoned, without even a minor/patch release (initools, 2010) or in some cases a code commit (e.g. pathtools, 2012) for five years or more. I suspect that they will never be Py3, the community will just move on to alternatives.

2. Working hard to bring support (e.g. ansible).

3. Part of the graphite ecosystem. If the base library won't change, none of its ecosystem will.

4. Not on public version control / issue tracking, so who knows (e.g. supervisord)

A brief look around the supervisor site indicates that they have public version control and issue tracking on their github page[0] and that they have a merged PR[1] to add python 3 testing (which appears to be passing).

[0] https://github.com/Supervisor/supervisor [1] https://github.com/Supervisor/supervisor/pull/901

According to their README[1], supervisor does not yet work correctly on Python 3 and has a list of issues [2].

[1] https://github.com/Supervisor/supervisor/blob/master/README....

[2] https://github.com/Supervisor/supervisor/labels/python%203

Thank you. I wonder why they don't list this in their setup.py

I meant the repo and bug tracker, which is can we listed in setup.py and is picked up by pypi.

The repo has Python 3 listed in setup.py. Are you saying it isn't?

(It's not getting picked up by pypi because they haven't made a release with the trove classifier yet.)

No, setup.py doesn't list the repo and bug tracker, so pypi doesn't list the repo and bug tracker either.

Ahh. I see. Thanks.

Ohh, they just haven't released it to pypi yet.

In addition, Fabric doesn't support Python 3. The feedback I've gotten back on when Python 3 will be supported and how much of the legacy fabric API's will be supported is even more limited.

There is a fork with Python 3 support: https://github.com/mathiasertl/fabric/

If you use fabtools, I maintain a fork of it for fabric3: https://github.com/develtech/fabtools/tree/fabric3

I use your fork, thank you for your work!

Yeah, the fabric3 fork works really well.

Also, the fabric author has been making a lot of progress on Fabric 2, which works on Python 3.


Lack of commit activity doesn't necessarily mean a package is obsolete. A small set of well defined functionality can be "done" at some point and need no further changes.

My choice of word was unnecessarily pejorative. I agree.

Though I would say that it's the stretch to say it might 'need no further changes' if it doesn't work with the latest version of python.

All software rots because even if the functionality never needs to change, the world (and the APIs) around it will. Some code just rots slower than others.

5. Has other equally or more cable alternatives in python3. Eg there's no reason to use python-ldap when you have ldap3.

If you do need supervisord, a (from my experience) suitable alternative is circusd. Though I’ve since moved to having either the operating system’s process manager (usually systemd anymore) or docker become my process manager.

Huh. I know if I have a server that only has python3, Ansible can configure that server with only the python3 interpreter available. So Ansible can use python3 on the box it's configuring, but not the host it's running from?

I believe they just haven't officially defined Ansible as Python 3 compliant because there are still open issues in Github related to Python 2.

I have been using Ansible exclusively with Python 3 for over a year and only stumbled into incompatible code once, a simple case of string VS bytes literals that got quickly fixed.

so you're executing ansible with:

  python3 /usr/bin/ansible $cmd
if you're using plain `ansible` from the repos or pip, you're using python2.

/edit: there is actually a source for that, go figure: http://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/python_3_support.html

yes, its the ansible binary that needs python2.

there is experimental python3 support since 2.2 though.

Supervisord isn't open source? What

Open source doesn't mean the source must be publicly available for everyone to read. :)

That's exactly what I thought open source meant. How can a source be open if not everyone can read it? I didn't get your comment.

Open source can mean that the source is available on request, or is available after purchasing a licence. It doesn't have to be publicly available to be open source, though in practice it pretty much always is.

True :) I've just come to think Open Source == FOSS

Even with the GPL, the source doesn't need to be publicly available for everyone to read. Only paying customers are guaranteed the right to the code. (Some car makers have GPL software and only give out the source code to verified car owners.)

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact