[PATCHES] Build pytalloc for two Python versions at once, port to py3

Jelmer Vernooij jelmer at samba.org
Tue Mar 17 06:28:03 MDT 2015

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 12:16:03PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 03/16/2015 08:51 PM, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 12:14 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> >>On 03/14/2015 10:17 AM, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >>>On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 14:00 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> >(This may help explain our ambivalence about the whole reason for
> >python3 in the first place)
> >
> >When I get some head-space, I'm going to write about the difficulty the
> >Samba Team faces with this kind of project.  I spoke before about the
> >async ldb example, but after ntdb came up, I realise we have been here
> >before on other efforts.  I'm quite concerned to ensure we don't waste
> >your efforts, and that we are all agreed on the risks and benefits.
> I'm looking forward to that.
> The key difference I see here is that ldb/tdb can continue working
> indefinitely. Python 2 will not – or at least after 2.7's 10-year upstream
> support goes away, Samba would most likely need to take over maintaining its
> own copy.

I think what Andrew is getting at is that the main reason we care about Python3
support is to accomodate others like yourself. For Samba itself Python2 works
just fine, and we would wait a few more years with porting to or supporting
Python 3 if that was our only concern.

Traditionally Samba hasn't done well with projects where there is only one
developer that cares about it, but that impacts others (e.g. ntdb). The
other developers are burdened by a new set of hoops to jump through when
working on Samba, and the code tends to bitrot without the person
that championed it.


More information about the samba-technical mailing list