Re: Porting wptserve handlers to Python 3: next steps / code review

Thank you, Josh & Philip!

I've updated the RFC <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/pull/49> to
reflect our latest consensus (preferring bytes everywhere). Please take
another look (the diff
<https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/pull/49/commits/2e95208da921d31cfbd38a37204777bd62ef1fd1>
isn't big because I basically swapped two sections with some additions).

Stephen, would it be possible to tweak wpt-pr-bot to handle PRs with the
"python3" label and assign them to a special pool of reviewers?

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:17 AM Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@chromium.org>
wrote:

> I can confirm I volunteer to review!
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 8:54 PM Josh Matthews <josh@joshmatthews.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I've got some experience porting the eventsource handlers (although I
>> haven't submitted that PR yet due to a couple unfinished tricky handlers),
>> so I can review PRs as well.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Josh
>>
>> On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 13:03, Stephen Mcgruer <smcgruer@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for sending this email Robert; I'm excited to see us keep the
>>> ball rolling on Python 3 support.
>>>
>>> > In addition, we'd really appreciate a few more people to sign up for
>>> reviewing these changes to share the workload. Anyone volunteering?
>>>
>>> I'm happy to review PRs, albeit with no specific prior knowledge.
>>> +foolip, who volunteered to review as well.
>>>
>>> That'd bring us to 5 reviewers assuming jgraham and annevk are willing
>>> to review; do you think that is enough Robert?
>>>
>>> On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 18:19, Robert Ma <robertma@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>
>>>> We're getting close to finalizing the plan for migrating close to 500
>>>> wptserve handlers we have in WPT. Now we have a few concrete steps to take:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Regarding the trial PR
>>>> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/23363>, James, Anne
>>>> and others who'd like to take a look, do you have any other comments on
>>>> this PR, especially high-level ones about the general approach? This would
>>>> unblock the following steps and we can address small issues in parallel.
>>>> 2. If we agree this approach is what we wanted by having consistent and
>>>> explicit semantics across Python 2 and 3, I'll update the RFC
>>>> <https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/pull/49> (essentially
>>>> swapping the currently "recommended" and "alternative" approaches and
>>>> filling in some more concrete guidelines), and kick off a new round of RFC
>>>> process (hopefully relatively quick since many people are already on board
>>>> with the new approach).
>>>> 3. Meanwhile, Ziran can start porting more handlers (we can wait until
>>>> the RFC is accepted to actually merge the PRs). We have hundreds of
>>>> handlers and we should expect lots of PRs. Reviewing them is a critical
>>>> task, too. Since we now have concrete guidelines and changes will be
>>>> largely mechanical, I'm proposing to adopt the "LGTM % nits" convention
>>>> widely used in Chromium: if a PR largely looks good but has some minor
>>>> issues, approve the PR with comments. In addition, we'd really appreciate a
>>>> few more people to sign up for reviewing these changes to share the
>>>> workload. Anyone volunteering?
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>