RFC: CI limitations and using 'six' module for python2/3 compatability

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 12:20 +1200, Garming Sam via samba-technical
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I would have some reservations about using six. The last time I talked
> to Andrew, he felt quite strongly about the matter too. The overall
> summary of the concern is that we would be left at a half-way point
> which is neither purely-standard Python 2 nor Python 3 (as well as
> gaining the additional dependency on six). If the distros are as serious
> about dropping support for Python 2 as they claim, then having pure
> Python 3 would be preferable. The last thing I would want is a secondary
> effort required just to remove six as a dependency and rewrite it in
> Python 3 anyways.
> 
> If the consensus really is to use six, at the very least I would propose
> that we use it in as constrained a way as possible. The straightforward
> renames and the example with urllib seem reasonable enough. On the other
> hand, using pretty much any of the six object model (or even syntax
> compatibility) does not seem like a particularly great idea in my view.
> 
> (In regards to Gitlab, it needs to be added to the list of dependencies
> and then an image rebuilt).
> 
> Cheers,

Thanks Garming,

This captures my views on that matter very well.

Thanks,

Andrew Bartlett
-- 
Andrew Bartlett                       http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba