[Biopython] Fwd: Biopython 1.76 plans

[Peter Cock]

A brief discussion with Chris about next steps in 2020 once this release is
done.

Peter

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Chris Rands <c_rands100 at hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 18:03
Subject: Re: [Biopython] Biopython 1.76 plans
To: Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>


Thanks Peter, I like your plan, and please do fwd to the mailing list if
you think it's of broad interest

Chris

------------------------------
*From:* Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>
*Sent:* 18 December 2019 6:09 PM
*To:* Chris Rands <c_rands100 at hotmail.com>
*Subject:* Re: [Biopython] Biopython 1.76 plans

Shall we stay on the list? My plan:

(1) Release Biopython 1.76 with Python 2.7 and 3.5 support
(2) Turn off testing under Python 2.7 and 3.5

Then tackle the low handing fruit (in no particular order):

(3) Remove Bio._py3k compatibility shim
(4) Look for and remove other Python 2 specific workarounds
(5) Remove no longer needed __future__ imports etc
(6) Remove all the Python 2/3 overhead in the C code

Also, where sensible and after appropriate discussion, take
advantage of new language or standard library features in
Python 3.6+ as appropriate (e.g. sorted dictionaries by default
without needing to import OrderedDict from collections).

I hadn't thought much about f-strings (beyond that I'm not
used to them and that makes me dislike them), but that could
be a good example.

Peter

On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 4:52 PM Chris Rands <c_rands100 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> Apologies if this has already been discussed, but is the plan to merely
passively drop support for Python 2/Python 3.5 or to also actively update
existing code?
>
> For example, in 2020, would you merge a PR converting all string
formatting to f-strings (supported since Python 3.6) or removing all `from
__future__ import print_function` lines?
>
> Best, Chris
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Biopython <biopython-bounces+c_rands100=
hotmail.com at mailman.open-bio.org> on behalf of Peter Cock <
p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>
> Sent: 18 December 2019 5:16 PM
> To: Biopython Mailing List <biopython at mailman.open-bio.org>
> Subject: [Biopython] Biopython 1.76 plans
>
> Dear Biopythoneers,
>
> As has been discussed earlier, we hope to release Biopython 1.76 this
> month (December 2019). This will be a significant milestone as our
> final release to support Python 2 which is now officially at end of
> life:
>
> https://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython/2019-November/016735.html
>
> https://python3statement.org/
>
> Additionally, I am proposing this also be the final release to support
> Python 3.5:
>
> https://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython/2019-December/016737.html
>
> We had a couple of issues reported with Biopython 1.75 post release,
> mainly from the Debian packaging team covering C code doctests and C
> code on alternative CPUs - which are now being tested via TravisCI.
>
> Otherwise I am not aware of any reported issues which would be a
> release blocker.
>
> If no one has any objections, I propose to do the release this Friday,
> 20 December 2019.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> Biopython mailing list  -  Biopython at mailman.open-bio.org
> https://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython/attachments/20191218/ddb06d2b/attachment.htm>