Re: [DISCUSS] Re-think CI strategy?
Not wanting to answer for Wes, but those are two sides of the same coin:
reducing CI overhead and complexity helps increase developer
productivity. Reducing CI overhead is not a goal *in itself* (unless
there are money issues I don't know about) ;-)
The productivity cost of being Python 2-compatible is not very high
*currently* (since much of the cost is a sunk cost by now), but these
things all add up. So at some point we should really drop Python 2.
Whether it's 2019 or 2020, I don't know and I don't get to decide.
However, anything later than 2020 is excessively conservative IMHO.
Le 06/08/2018 à 19:46, Robert Nishihara a écrit :
> Wes, do you primarily want to drop Python 2 to speed up Travis or to reduce
> the development overhead? In my experience the development overhead is
> minimal and well worth it. For Travis, we could consider looking into other
> options like paying for more concurrency.
> January 2019 is very soon and Python 2 is still massively popular.
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 5:11 AM Wes McKinney <wesmckinn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> The 40+ minutes Travis-CI job already uses the toolchain packages AFAIK.
>>> Don't they include thrift?
>> I was referring to your comment about "parquet-cpp AppVeyor builds are
>> abysmally slow". I think the slowness is in significant part due to
>> the ExternalProject builds, where Thrift is the worst offender.