Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

sheddingbikes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 251 posts

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#101

Post by lincolnq »

apgwoz wrote: post #79
aphexairlines wrote: post #3

what about dumping a local python install in $HOME/local/opt/mongrel-python if m2sh didn't find a version it likes? (yes, it's overkill)

This is an insane idea. I should not have to have a whole other version of python just to run a language independent web server. The choice Zed made is a great choice--all the functionality of the original python m2sh is present in the new, and there's nothing external to support, or dump somewhere else.

It's not that crazy. Python is designed for embedding. The interpreter is small. Commercial software that depends on Python (almost) always embeds it.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#102

Post by sophacles »

rbanffy wrote: post #69
Confusion wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He doesn't blame it on 'some boneheaded decision'. As far as I can see, he doesn't blame anyone, he just notes the current state of affairs, in which the situation is indeed pretty much broken. Not just for him, because he is far from the only one that thinks it should work a certain way. that's why virtualenv was invented Yes and shouldn't it also be the OSes that use it to isolate their default Python install?

It's a design decision. They have a default Python install they support, validate and keep working that you shouldn't mess with. I am pretty sure you can't ruin a RHEL just by installing RPMs from RH's repos. If the Python the OS vendor provides is somewhat inadequate to you, it's your job to provide another one or to use another distro. However, if you choose to write your code against the distro's Python (something…

It is completely possible, easy and reasonable to have a multiple versions of python installed. Many OSes do this, and the convention is to have them named like python2.4 python2.5 and so on.

Any system scripts that require 2.4 can then change their shebang to say /usr/bin/python2.4. At the very same time, packages for newer pythons can be made available for ease-of-use for the rest of the world. This breaks nothing.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#103

Post by dagw »

nailer wrote: post #90
dagw wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good solution. I've been a sys admin for several large unix systems and variations on the problem Zed describes needed to be hacked around on each and every one of them.

I think we agree. If I were doing an OS now, I'd also ignore the FHS completely, but more to the point: I wouldn't use anything that remotely resembles it either. / would have one dir: /myos And all OS components are under there: /myos/bin/python People can install anything they want outside /myos, but I'd make it very clear that the OS owns this folder and it should not be modified.

Yup, that's basically what I'm looking for.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#104

Post by cdavid »

cookiecaper wrote: post #62
cdavid wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am curious: how do you think virtualenv and pip would solve the issue of antiquated python ? The only thing that virtualenv does is to install packages in some temporary location, that you can throw away later without impacting anything outside python. Virtualenv does nothing to solve those issues. I am actually wondering whether it does not even aggravates them because people think those tools magically solve back…

Create your virtualenv with --no-site-packages. Of course you have to use a different Python to run virtualenv, it's not that hard to build but if you have something against that it shouldn't be too hard to find a newer binary out there somewhere. So, what's the complaint here? You have to obtain a new version of Python if you want to use a newer version of Python than what comes with the system? That's pretty self-e…

If you build yourself a new python, what's the point of virtualenv ? Compiling python is of course possible, although quite a chore if all you want is to configure some software.

Concerning the need to obtain a new python if you want to use a newer python: yes, it is more or less evident, but that's Zed Shaw's point, not mine. Where he has a point IMO is about the brokenness of the installed python - many distributions make too many changes w.r.t. upstream without understanding the consequences. To distro's defend, the python packaging solutions are so poorly thought out that python itself is not helping the situation.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#105

Post by ubernostrum »

bcl wrote: post #94

FYI - Fedora 13 shipped with Python 2.6, Fedora 14 is going to ship with Python 2.7 and 3.1 in parallel. Not every distribution ships ancient versions. I also recommend using virtualenv and pip, these tools make it much easier to create an easily reproducable Python environment.

Not every distribution ships ancient versions.

RHEL, meanwhile, does not ship 3.1, 2.7 or 2.6. And to be perfectly honest, if you're seriously distributing Python software you have to take RHEL into account -- "Fedora ships something newer" doesn't help.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#106

Post by ubernostrum »

jedbrown wrote: post #78
ubernostrum wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm concerned with the general case of writing Python software. Zed's example perhaps could get by, but offers some minor annoyances. Distributing a framework like Django, on the other hand, when distros lag six years behind current Python, is a royal pain in the ass.

Django is in a very different situation because Python is central to all of its users, therefore it is reasonable to expect that they maintain a somewhat modern (released in the last 3 or 5 years, say) environment. When Python merely performs a subsidiary role, and your users may never use it themselves, it is far more important to support old versions.

I mentioned Django as a counterexample; the conversation seemed to be heading toward using the single specific example of Mongrel to demonstrate that there either is not a problem here or that it's not particularly serious.

Meanwhile, anyone who depends on Python for much more than a config-file parser knows what a genuine and large issue this is, and that "just write to the lowest common denominator" is not really a reasonable solution.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#107

Post by ubernostrum »

dschobel wrote: post #29
mfukar wrote: post #21

Python, as per Guido Van Rossum's wishes, is pushing for suspension of all language syntax and built-in changes and work towards preserving semantics, precisely for giving time to alternative implementations time to catch up with CPython, as well as the various distributions to catch up with Python's recent progress. In short: "...have killed Python" is a hyperbole for saying "I was tired to hear people nagging about…

I've never heard the distro argument used by any of the python maintainers and I would be surprised if they had. The solution to distros which are bundling three year old software is not to halt your progress for three years, that should be obvious.

The solution to distros which are bundling three year old software is not to halt your progress for three years, that should be obvious.

Speaking as Django's release manager: Red Hat's continued use and support of ancient 2.x Python versions has been a factor in the schedule we're developing for migration to Python 3.x. We can't simply pull the rug out from under anyone who's using Django on RHEL.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#108

Post by jedbrown »

ubernostrum wrote: post #106
jedbrown wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Django is in a very different situation because Python is central to all of its users, therefore it is reasonable to expect that they maintain a somewhat modern (released in the last 3 or 5 years, say) environment. When Python merely performs a subsidiary role, and your users may never use it themselves, it is far more important to support old versions.

I mentioned Django as a counterexample; the conversation seemed to be heading toward using the single specific example of Mongrel to demonstrate that there either is not a problem here or that it's not particularly serious. Meanwhile, anyone who depends on Python for much more than a config-file parser knows what a genuine and large issue this is, and that "just write to the lowest common denominator" is not really a…

My point is that the lowest common denominator is higher for users of something like Django because Python is a central component of what they do, thus it's reasonable to assume that they are not using an 8-year old Python environment.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#109

Post by ptn »

bcl wrote: post #94

FYI - Fedora 13 shipped with Python 2.6, Fedora 14 is going to ship with Python 2.7 and 3.1 in parallel. Not every distribution ships ancient versions. I also recommend using virtualenv and pip, these tools make it much easier to create an easily reproducable Python environment.

CentOS is on 2.4

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#110

Post by ubernostrum »

jedbrown wrote: post #108
ubernostrum wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mentioned Django as a counterexample; the conversation seemed to be heading toward using the single specific example of Mongrel to demonstrate that there either is not a problem here or that it's not particularly serious. Meanwhile, anyone who depends on Python for much more than a config-file parser knows what a genuine and large issue this is, and that "just write to the lowest common denominator" is not really a…

My point is that the lowest common denominator is higher for users of something like Django because Python is a central component of what they do, thus it's reasonable to assume that they are not using an 8-year old Python environment.

Tell that to the many, many people I know who are using Django on RHEL. There's a reason why we just (as of Django 1.2) got around to dropping Python 2.3 support...
Post reply on HN