Version to use for new project and python3

[Rich Shepard]

An important new project will use python3 rather than python2 (time to
learn the new version in any case). Is the installed wxPython-3.0.2.0 the
version that should be used for a forward-compatible application?

Thanks,

Rich

[Karsten Hilbert]

Yes (note that wxP*-3 does NOT mean python3).

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ eu.pool.sks-keyservers.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

[Werner]

Hi Rich,

For Python 3 you will have to use wxPython Phoenix, note that there is
no official release yet and not everything is yet ported.

http://www.wxpython.org/Phoenix/docs/html/main.html

http://wiki.wxpython.org/How%20to%20install%20wxPython#Installing_wxPython-Phoenix_using_pip

Werner

[Rich Shepard]

On Thu, 21 May 2015, Karsten Hilbert wrote:

> Yes (note that wxP*-3 does NOT mean python3).

Karsten,

Understood. Also, I read that Phoenix is not yet as complete as Classic.
The port from python2 to python3 will wait.

Thanks,

Rich

[Rich Shepard]

On Thu, 21 May 2015, Werner wrote:

> For Python 3 you will have to use wxPython Phoenix, note that there is no
> official release yet and not everything is yet ported.

Thanks, Werner. I should have confirmed that before writing. So, I'll use
python3 syntax (to the extent I can) while running it with python2.

Rich

[Chris Barker]

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:16 AM, Rich Shepard <rshe...@appl-ecosys.com> wrote:

  Thanks, Werner. I should have confirmed that before writing. 

So, I'll use
python3 syntax (to the extent I can) while running it with python2.

you might try Phoenix and see if it currently meets your needs.

But anyway, you can write very compatible py2-py3 code. There are a number of resources for this on the web. Here is one:

http://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html

-CHB 

--

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R            (206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115       (206) 526-6317   main reception

Chris....@noaa.gov

[Rich Shepard]

On Thu, 21 May 2015, Chris Barker wrote:

> you might try Phoenix and see if it currently meets your needs.

Chris,

Perhaps after I get a working prototype.

> But anyway, you can write very compatible py2-py3 code. There are a number
> of resources for this on the web. Here is one:
> http://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html

Thanks. That's what I need; makes life much simpler.

Regards.

Rich

[Tim Roberts]

Rich Shepard wrote:
> Understood. Also, I read that Phoenix is not yet as complete as Classic.
> The port from python2 to python3 will wait.

Well, completeness is only an issue if you need the things that aren't
there, and for the most part the only things missing are relatively
obscure. Unless your application is pushing the edge of the envelope,
Phoenix should be fine. I have not had any annoying issues since migrating.

(Although I do have to admit, sheepishly, that I'm being drawn into the
PyQt/PySide camp for UI work...)

--
Tim Roberts, ti...@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

[Rich Shepard]

On Thu, 21 May 2015, Tim Roberts wrote:

> Well, completeness is only an issue if you need the things that aren't
> there,

Tim,

Quite true.

> ... and for the most part the only things missing are relatively

> obscure. Unless your application is pushing the edge of the envelope,
> Phoenix should be fine. I have not had any annoying issues since
> migrating.

There's the rub: I've no idea whether this application is back from the
edge, pushing it, or over it.

> (Although I do have to admit, sheepishly, that I'm being drawn into the
> PyQt/PySide camp for UI work...)

Seems that there are licensing issues with Qt, PyQt, or both. Since I've
used wxPython (with sporatic projects) for about a dozen years I have no
compelling reason to look elsewhere.

Thanks for your insights,

Rich

[Tim Roberts]

Rich Shepard wrote:

(Although I do have to admit, sheepishly, that I'm being drawn into the
PyQt/PySide camp for UI work...)

   Seems that there are licensing issues with Qt, PyQt, or both.

That FUD has been thrown about for years.  There are licensing issues with every library.  I'll wager, for example, that you don't actually know what the wxPython/wxWidgets license says.

[Rich Shepard]

On Fri, 22 May 2015, Tim Roberts wrote:

> That FUD has been thrown about for years. There are licensing issues with

> *every* library. I'll wager, for example, that you don't actually know

> what the wxPython/wxWidgets license says.

" wxWindows Library Licence, Version 3.1
======================================
...

This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
under the terms of the GNU Library General Public Licence as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the Licence, or (at
your option) any later version.

...
"
It's true that I've not read GPL-2 for a number of years, but I suspect
that it has not significantly changed. Version 3 is different, but my use of
tools licensed under GPL/LGPL-2 are essentially unrestricted.

Since I don't use Qt, PyQt, or PySide my knowledge of their licensing is
limited to what I've read by users on other maillists. They might well be
mistaken. Regardless, calling 'licensing issues' FUD diminishes the value of
the acronym. Writing that there might be more restrictive licensing issues
with one of the above than with wxPython has nothing to do with the
promolgation of fear, uncertainty, or doubt. At least, not in my opinion.

Apologies that my statement offended you so. It was not intended to do so.

Rich

[Chris Barker]

OT here, but....

There _ARE_ significant licensing differences between wx and QT/PyQT that effect some users. And that has been, in fact, a major reason for some folks to prefer wx for years. However, Tim is right that there isn't anything inherently wrong with the licensing of QT projects, just that they may not meet a given person's needs:

wx is essentially a modified LGPL (that first L is critical) -- this makes it suitable for use with most open source AND proprietary projects.

QT itself used to be dual licensed under a commercial licence or the GPL -- that made it suitable for use with commercial projects that wanted to pay for it, or GPL-only open source projects -- but not open source projects with less restrictive licenses (MIT, BSD, etc). However, it is my understanding that QT was re-licensed when Nokia bought it -- so may be suitable for a wider range of projects now.

PyQT is a separate project with its own licensing issues (a bit confused as to what they are -- GPL?). THis was the main driver behind the PySide project, which is, as far as I can tell, very similar to PyQT functionally, but has a more flexible license -- honestly, not sure which!

My conclusion: the licensing issues are real but may or may not be a problem for any given project -- read them to be sure.

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Rich Shepard <rshe...@appl-ecosys.com> wrote:

 

 but my use of
tools licensed under GPL/LGPL-2 are essentially unrestricted.

if GPL works for you (not only LGPL), then you would probably be fine with the QT tools. Note that (IANAL), the key point is that if use a GPL library, your own code essentially has to be GPL -- if you're happy with that, you're good to go.

-Chris

[jmfauth]

Contrary to wxPhoenix, PyQt is installable.
You know click, click, clck...
Regards,

[Chris Barker - NOAA Federal]

WxPhoenix is being distributed as a binary wheel, yes?

Arguably a better option than a Installer.

-Chris

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "wxPython-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wxpython-user...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.