Review usage of unicode_literals

[untitaker]

See #187

[geier]

I'm with hobarrera on this, I don't have a problem with unicode_literals and haven't seen them brake something yet.

[untitaker]

Click will warn if unicode literals are used: pallets/click@5f33770

[untitaker]

See also:

• Proposal to not use unicode_literals PythonCharmers/python-future#22
• https://gist.github.com/mitsuhiko/0b6c7894ed0fe8aeed45

[geier]

I guess we'll have to obey than.

[geier]

turns out you were right all along :-o
the idiotic decode in 8b25e5f is only needed because of the unicode literals.

[WhyNotHugo]

From PythonCharmers/python-future#22:

Only a very low number of people are using Python 3.2 or older

I don't agree with this. Python 2.7 is still quite popular, probably the default for > 50% of the users.

---

While I don't really like how the code looks after these changes, I guess functionality is more important than aesthetics, so I won't argue on this further. :)

[untitaker]

This is only talking about Python 3 versions.

[geier]

I'm not a fan of the look either :( I'd love to drop python 2 support all along.

[WhyNotHugo]

I'm not a fan of the look either :( I'd love to drop python 2 support all along.

+1 on this. Also getting rid of compat+six. However, we really need to know if it's possible for downstream packages to update to py3 (maybe the entire dependency tree is missing from many distributions?).

We could open a separate issue and open this for discussion with downstream packagers and users.

[untitaker]

It's unlikely that Debian or some other LTS distros ship with 3.3+ as their
Python 3 package. However, khal depends on vdirsyncer, which requires 3.3+ or
2.7+.

Options:

• Remove vdirsyncer as dependency (good idea for other reasons too)
• Vdirsyncer drops Py2 support simultaneously.

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:10:08PM -0800, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:

I'm not a fan of the look either :( I'd love to drop python 2 support all along.

+1 on this. Also getting rid of compat+six. However, we really need to know if it's possible for downstream packages to update to py3 (maybe the entire dependency tree is missing from many distributions?).

We could open a separate issue and open this for discussion with downstream packagers and users.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#189 (comment)

[WhyNotHugo]

Debian seems to include python3.3 on stable+ (source):

• python3.4: stable, testing
• python3.5: testing, unstable

Only oldstable seems to include python3 < 3.3 (it has 3.1, according to the above link). I really don't think we should limit ourselves because of Debian-oldstable.

However, the issue is if all other dependencies are available (otherwise the burden of packaging+maintaining would fall on the current khal maintainer, most likely).

Also: Does khal currently work with python3<3.3?

[untitaker]

Also: Does khal currently work with python3<3.3?

Definetly doesn't, because of u"".

[untitaker]

Also bug-wise it's not ideal to use 3.3, a lot of stuff got ironed out in later versions.

[untitaker]

#302