Utils: Encode str to bytes in Executor.run #421
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is the input complement to the output decoding added in 2cb245f4eb.
In
Admin.py, some output is passed back in as input, which causes a crash in Python 3 without this change.Somewhat related (and possibly controversial) thoughts: The codebase is getting rather hairy due to having support for both modern and ancient versions of Python. How likely is it that a distribution will include a 2021+ version of bcfg2, but not have a version of Python 3 from at least 2017? Would it be reasonable to drop the 1.4 release entirely, and instead focus on a hypothetical 2.0 with support only for Python 3.6+, or something along those lines? I understand the desire to keep compatibility with existing software, and the amount of work put into bcfg2 towards this goal is commendable. It would certainly be a shame to discard it all, but does it still provide enough benefit to justify the added maintenance burden?