[Twisted-Python] Need clarification on reviews for Python 3 fixes for Twisted

[Itamar Turner-Trauring]

On 05/27/2016 04:19 AM, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> However, Adi has mentioned that in this document: 
> http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/wiki/Plan/Python3,
> the strategy of submitting incremental Python3 fixes is not mentioned.
> Before doing any further reviews, Adi would like clarification that
> these types of reviews/patches are OK for submission and review.
>
> Are they OK?  Would it be possible extend the Plan/Python3 document to 
> accept incremental Python3 fixes
> as long as:
>
>  * adheres to Twisted coding standards
>  * works on Python 2.7
>  * passes existing tests
>  * comes with new tests if functionality is changed that is not 
> currently being tested
>
> My experience working with Python3 on other projects, is that incremental
> fixes is easier to review and get working, rather than an all or 
> nothing approach.
> Some Python3 porting such as bytes/string/unicode or Python C API 
> changes are very hard,
> while print vs. print() are very easy.  Holding up the easy changes, 
> until every hard change
> is also done is quite hard, and slows things down.

I think they're fine to accept insofar as:

1. There is strong ongoing momentum for the port now, so these changes 
makes porting module-by-module easier and won't just bitrot.
2. They're doing one particular incompatibility at a time, rather than 
"here's an assortment of random changes to a module that may or may not 
port that module fully, who knows."

I don't think they are sufficient to port a module (someone needs to 
read the code and think a bit, usually), but they will make it easier to 
do so, so they definitely are worth continuing.

-Itamar