Add Python 3 to the build matrix.

[zenhack]

There is predicatbly a failure, but I suspect it's something actually related to Python 3 now, so I'm submitting this as a pr.

Relates to: #700

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1685

• 0 of 0 (NaN%) changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 59.338%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 1681:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	2097
Relevant Lines:	3534

---

💛 - Coveralls

[xuhang57]

I might not know what I am talking about. But fwiw, normally, python 3 is using pip3 rather than pip2 to manage packages so does that mean we need to update that in travis for our python 3 build?

[naved001]

Didn't make a difference when I was using pip3 vs pip for installing in my python3 virtualenv. it just couldn't import importlib._bootstrap in both cases (the current failure in our travis build).

[naved001]

Also, in a virtualenv with python3 as default, pip seems to refer to pip3.

(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ python --version
Python 3.5.2
(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ pip --version
pip 9.0.1 from /home/naved/hil/.venv/lib/python3.5/site-packages (python 3.5)
(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ pip3 --version
pip 9.0.1 from /home/naved/hil/.venv/lib/python3.5/site-packages (python 3.5)
(.venv) naved:~/hil/.venv/bin$ pip2 --version
pip 9.0.1 from /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages (python 2.7)

[xuhang57]

Is there a way to let travis to show all builds on this page?

[xuhang57]

I know you are using 3.4 because 3.6 is failing. But since 3.4 is failing as well, should we just use 3.6?

[xuhang57]

https://devguide.python.org/#status-of-python-branches

Given what it says in the official guide, we should start with 3.6 since 3.4 will be deprecated even before 2.7

[zenhack]

Quoting Lucas H. Xu (2018-03-05 16:38:23)

I know you are using 3.4 because 3.6 is failing. But since 3.4 is failing as well, should we just use 3.6?

We expect failures from any 3.x variant, but the 3.6 failures look like they're not even getting as far as *installing* python 3.6. I suspect the current failure is an actual portability bug, which is a bit better.

[xuhang57]

@zenhack Thanks for explaining it. Should we install python 3.6 in the Travis container then?

My point is more like, instead of supporting 3.4 now, which it will be deprecated before 2020, we should look into 3.6 which we don't have to bother ourselves to do a version bump later since we are just about to set thing ups. Admittedly, I am not against using 3.4

[zenhack]

The 3.x series isn't terribly variable, and 3.4 takes less set-up now. By the time it's actually unsupported by the PSF, we can probably upgrade to another version in travis just by bumping the number in our config, whereas right now it's a (small) bit of work. If you want to do that work, I'm happy to accept a patch. Quoting Lucas H. Xu (2018-03-05 17:15:37)

…

***@***.*** Thanks for explaining it. Should we install python 3.6 in the Travis container then? My point is more like, instead of supporting 3.4 now, which it will be deprecated before 2020, we should look into 3.6 which we don't have to bother ourselves to do a version bump later since we are just about to set thing ups. Admittedly, I am not against using 3.4 -- You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [2]view it on GitHub, or [3]mute the thread. Verweise 1. https://github.com/zenhack 2. #968 (comment) 3. https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA18PpQPvTFM1xbmsVlGXuK72Ovfq9Ylks5tbbkJgaJpZM4SdSi9

[xuhang57]

I suggest we could merge this and close the issue #700 . Maybe open a new issue that is about supporting python 3. Or we could just keep using the old issue.

Thanks Ian!

[xuhang57]

LGTM