Skip to content

py2.6 support #635

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

py2.6 support #635

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

casperdcl
Copy link

basic support for an old server running python2.6

@theengineear
Copy link
Contributor

@casperdcl , thanks for the PR, but we decided to drop python 2.6 support in #252.

We will continue to support Python 2.7 for the foreseeable future though.

//cc @chriddyp (in case you want to go back on the python 2.6 thing)

@theengineear
Copy link
Contributor

I'm going to close this for now, but feel free to reopen if we decide to revert our previous decision to stop testing on Python 2.6

@casperdcl
Copy link
Author

casperdcl commented Dec 30, 2016

Hi @theengineear. I sympathise with not actively supporting py2.6. However a PR which introduces backward compatibility without breaking anything (and which passes all unit tests) seems to merit merging. Many hosts still only support py2.6 and it's a little silly to keep rebasing my patched fork version onto future changes here.

Check out this hit counter link from one of my repos to see plotly.py2.6 in action: tqdm-hits

@theengineear
Copy link
Contributor

@casperdcl point definitely taken. Did you manage to find all the cases where we use {} instead of {0}, etc for formatting?

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19668395/str-format-for-python-2-6-gives-error-where-2-7-does-not

I remember that being a pain.

If you're sure those are all taken care of, I could be swayed. We should make sure to officially add it back as a tested version in our CI tests though.

@theengineear theengineear reopened this Dec 30, 2016
@theengineear
Copy link
Contributor

We should make sure to officially add it back as a tested version in our CI tests though.

And I'll handle doing this portion since we do some funny things in our CI setup.

@casperdcl
Copy link
Author

I only fixed what was necessary to get this basic plot working. I could grep through the rest if you'd like.

@theengineear
Copy link
Contributor

//cc @chriddyp , as much as I always want to move to Python 3, perhaps I've been a little over-zealous. I'm down to add back Python 2.6 if it's as painless as @casperdcl says ;)

I can work on adding some commits to this PR that add back testing for Python 2.6.

@theengineear theengineear mentioned this pull request Dec 31, 2016
@chriddyp
Copy link
Member

chriddyp commented Jan 2, 2017

Sure, if it's not too much of a problem going forward then I'm OK with it.

@jonmmease
Copy link
Contributor

Closing as this PR is pretty stale and at this point we're not interested in supporting Python 2.6. Thanks!

@jonmmease jonmmease closed this Sep 28, 2018
@casperdcl
Copy link
Author

No worries. It's getting harder to support py2.6 every day.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants