Re: Dropping Jython support? Was: Ideas for Biopython 2.0

Done:

https://github.com/biopython/biopython/commit/5594a723c2d2eba43048bbec81da41f83306abfa

Peter

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Peter Cock <[email protected]> wrote:
> OK, let's do that then. Thanks,
>
> Peter
>
> P.S. Are you getting any failure emails from mailman?
> Your recent messages are not (yet) on the archive, e.g.
> none linked to this thread - perhaps down to which email
> address you send from?
>
> http://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython-dev/2017-June/thread.html#21744
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Tiago Antão <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I would deprecate it for sure. Even if our code works, it's a severely
>> impaired platform as most of the scientific Python libraries are not
>> available
>>
>> On Jun 19, 2017 9:32 AM, "Peter Cock" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Tiago Antão <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Some comments:
>>> >
>>> > 9. As the person with the biggest number of users on Jython, I say:
>>> > forget supporting it.
>>>
>>> This is an important point - thank you for making it Tiago!
>>>
>>> Would you advocate being even more proactive? We could deprecate
>>> Jython support in the upcoming Biopython 1.70 release?
>>>
>>> Currently our TravisCI setup does not use Jython (there was a tox bug
>>> which prevented it, but that has been fixed not I think), and our buildbot
>>> machines currently fail on Jython due to various quirks for which we
>>> have not yet worked around in the test suite.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Peter

_______________________________________________
Biopython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython-dev