Skip to content

Introduced docs changes to indicate Python 3 compatability #554

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

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 5, 2018
Merged

Introduced docs changes to indicate Python 3 compatability #554

merged 8 commits into from
Jun 5, 2018

Conversation

cmonr
Copy link
Contributor

@cmonr cmonr commented Jun 1, 2018

No description provided.

@MarceloSalazar
Copy link
Contributor

@cmonr thanks for the update on docs.

As discussed with @BlackstoneEngineering, it's important that we clarify the backwards compatibility problem, as Python 3 tools won't work with OS < v5.8.

@cmonr
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmonr commented Jun 1, 2018

@MarceloSalazar Did you have something more specific in mind aside from e388e15 ?

@MarceloSalazar
Copy link
Contributor

@cmonr the last update is great! - I was reviewing an old version :)

What would happen if someone attempts to use Python 3 with a previous Mbed OS?
Would it should a clear error to the user?

@cmonr
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmonr commented Jun 1, 2018

@MarceloSalazar mbed-cli would most likely error with something cryptic, similar to what @ashok-rao first got when he tried to test on Windows this week.

However, I don't like the idea of introducing something that would do a live version check in mbed-cli, since mbed-cli is often used with detached versions of mbed-os, making version confirmation much more nuanced and time consuming.

@MarceloSalazar
Copy link
Contributor

making version confirmation much more nuanced and time consuming.

This is a serious UX problem and not acceptable.

We can't release something that is known to cause serious python traceback errors for many Mbed users.

If we don't have time to fix the tools, then let's delay the update on the docs until it's done, and set expectations accordingly.

@cmonr
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmonr commented Jun 1, 2018

@MarceloSalazar Should be doing a similar check with the pip version compatibility?

https://github.com/ARMmbed/Handbook/pull/549/files

Copy link
Contributor

@SenRamakri SenRamakri left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me. I do understand the backward compatibility issue @MarceloSalazar mentioned. But from the docs perspective, this looks good to me.

@MarceloSalazar
Copy link
Contributor

If we decide to go ahead, I'd like to have a known issue open with the release and start working to deliver a fix in a patch release

@adbridge FYI

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor

A fix for what exactly @MarceloSalazar?

@MarceloSalazar
Copy link
Contributor

@theotherjimmy see error and proposed solution in ARMmbed/mbed-cli#686

@AnotherButler
Copy link
Contributor

So do we have a code dependency for this document?

@cmonr
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmonr commented Jun 4, 2018

@AnotherButler I think so? I'm not sure what a code dependency implies in Handbook PRs.

There are a couple of moving pieces still, but here's the remaining list:

@AnotherButler
Copy link
Contributor

Should we wait for any of the mbed-os PRs to merge before merging this doc PR?

@cmonr
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmonr commented Jun 4, 2018

@AnotherButler I think we're fine to move forward with this PR outside of the above requirements. In any case, the above notes are all making quick progress on being resolved.

Copy edit for minor grammar nits and typos.
@AnotherButler AnotherButler merged commit 59882ab into ARMmbed:new_engine Jun 5, 2018
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.

5 participants