Python 3

[mofle]

Is there any plan or roadmap for porting Django to Python 3?

The latest info I could is from 1 year ago.

[Russell Keith-Magee]

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 6:52 AM, mofle <mof...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there any plan or roadmap for porting Django to Python 3?
>
> The latest info I could is from 1 year ago.

Nothing has really changed since a year ago. Python 3 support is on
our long term roadmap, but we're not planning to actively support
Python 3 any time soon.

Yours,
Russ Magee %-)

[sirex]

On 15 Gruo, 01:51, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com>
wrote:

> but we're not planning to actively support Python 3 any time soon.

Why?

Maybe there should be two versions of Django, one that supports Python
3 and other that supports Python 2?

[Russell Keith-Magee]

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 3:45 PM, sirex <sir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 15 Gruo, 01:51, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com>
> wrote:
>> but we're not planning to actively support Python 3 any time soon.
>
> Why?

Please search the archives, and the FAQ, for the answer to this
question. It's been answered *many* times.

Yours,
Russ Magee %-)

[Ian Kelly]

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:45 AM, sirex <sir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 15 Gruo, 01:51, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com>
> wrote:
>> but we're not planning to actively support Python 3 any time soon.
>
> Why?

Dependencies, for one. Psycopg2 and MySQLdb do not officially support
Python 3 yet, so the only backends available out of the box would be
oracle and sqlite3. Also PIL has not been ported, so ImageFields
would be unusable.

More importantly, the core devs don't want to have to support Python
2.4/2.5 and Python 3 simultaneously. Hence the suggested plan to
begin officially supporting Python 3 once support for 2.5 has been
deprecated.

> Maybe there should be two versions of Django, one that supports Python
> 3 and other that supports Python 2?

No.

[Łukasz Rekucki]

On 15 December 2010 17:48, Ian Kelly <ian.g...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:45 AM, sirex <sir...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 15 Gruo, 01:51, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com>
>> wrote:
>>> but we're not planning to actively support Python 3 any time soon.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Dependencies, for one.

Apart from external ones, there are still some unresolved
bytes/unicode issues in Python's own stdlib and the WSGI
specification. But there has been some significant progress in that
matter, like the new email package or PEP 444
(http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/). A year from now is
probably optimistic, but not unrealistic if Django 1.4 drops Python
2.5.

--
Łukasz Rekucki

[diogobaeder]

http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/faq/install/#can-i-use-django-with-python-3

[Graham Dumpleton]

On Thursday, December 16, 2010 4:11:25 AM UTC+11, Łukasz Rekucki wrote:

 But there has been some significant progress in that matter, like the new email package or PEP 444 (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/).

PEP 3333 and not PEP 444 is likely the more probable target for deploying on Python 3.

  http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3333/ 

PEP 444 is a moving target as people still want to keep changing it and no one agrees about it. PEP 3333 isn't going to change and is what Apache/mod_wsgi has supported for the last two years. CherryPy WSGI server and uWSGI are also PEP 3333 compliant for Python 3.

Graham