Test ActivePython separately?

[Ludwig Hähne]

Got the chance to test Pympler on a WinXP Box with ActivePython 2.4
(successfully). AFAIR, Jean suggested to test against ActivePython. So
far, ActivePython does not appear in the Test Matrix and I'm not sure
whether we want to burden ourselves with additional tests. Is
ActivePython different (and important) enough to justify additional
tests? Otherwise the test matrix would be complete ...

Ludwig

[Jean Brouwers]

Actually, the Python 2.5 and 2.6 tests on Windows and all tests on
MacOS X were done with ActivePython. ActivePython *is* a standard
Python build plus a bunch of additional modules.

Perhaps, we should mention that some tests we done with ActivePython
builds while other ones were Python builds from www.python.org. But
there is no need to test both on all platforms.

Lastly, I believe it is not possible to have both a Python and
ActivePython release installed for the same version, certainly not
with older versions prior to 2.6

/Jean

[Jean Brouwers]

FYI,

The Solaris 10 32-bit tests were also done with ActivePython builds
2.4.3, 2.5.2.2 and 2.6.0.0. In addition I only tried Pympler with
64-bit Python 2.5.1 and 2.6.1 built locally using SUN's compilers.
This was python setup.py try only but both PASSED.

/Jean

[Ludwig Hähne]

Thanks for the clarification. Some comments below.

Ludwig

Jean Brouwers wrote on 09.12.2008 17:43:
> Actually, the Python 2.5 and 2.6 tests on Windows and all tests on
> MacOS X were done with ActivePython. ActivePython *is* a standard
> Python build plus a bunch of additional modules.

Yes, but the additional modules (or the lack of those, e.g. win32) could
lead to problems. I think we are safe if we test ("setup.py try") at
least one vanilla Python on ActivePython platforms like Windows or
MacOSX. Maybe the next test matrix (Pympler 0.2?) should mention if we
tested against Python or ActivePython for a certain platform.

> Perhaps, we should mention that some tests we done with ActivePython
> builds while other ones were Python builds from www.python.org. But
> there is no need to test both on all platforms.

Agreed.

[Ludwig Hähne]

Thank you for the efforts. Our first release testing session flowed very
smoothly :) (is this correct English?)

Anybody want to push the button and upload our first Pympler 0.1
release? The other things left to do is to upload the HTML documentation
and to agree announcement text, right?

Cheers, Ludwig

[Jean Brouwers]

Better might be .... testing ran very smoothly ....

We're good to go. Please do push the button.

/Jean

[Jean Brouwers]

We should, I concur. But AFAIK, that is not possible with a pre-built
Python release for MacOS X for example. On MacOS X, pre-built Python
releases from ActivePython and Python tend to replace each other at
installation. Perhaps that no longer applies to 2.6, not sure.

Building a Python release from source can always be done, easily.
Pympler-01.rc1 was tried with the Python 2.5.2 and 2.6.1 built from
source and passed for both.

/Jean

[Jean Brouwers]

Just to make sure, I downloaded the Python 2.6.1 build for Windows and
installed that on Windows XP.

Then, I tried Pympler-0.1rc1 and that worked just fine. After
installing Pympler-0.1rc1 in Python 2.6.1, the tests all passed as
well.

/Jean

[Jean Brouwers]

One other piece of data. On Windows *is* possible to install
pre-built Python releases from ActivePython and MSI Python for the
same Python version side by side. By default, both install in a
directory C:\PythonX.Y and change that name to avoid conflicts.

/Jean

[Jean Brouwers]

I have tried Pympler 0.1(rc1) with the Python 2.4.4 and 2.5.2** MSI
builds from the Python web site and for both all tests pass with ...
setup.py try.

We probably should record this in the test matrix and make 2 columns
for each Python version, one for Python X.Y.Z and one for ActivePython
A.B.C.D.

/Jean

**) The 2.6.1 MSI build passed in an earlier test.

[Ludwig Hähne]

Let's do that for the next release (0.2 or 0.1.1).

Ludwig