uasyncio - asyncio-like cooperative multitasking framework for uPy

Discussion about programs, libraries and tools that work with MicroPython. Mostly these are provided by a third party.
Target audience: All users and developers of MicroPython.
pfalcon
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 2:05 pm

Re: uasyncio - asyncio-like cooperative multitasking framework for uPy

Post by pfalcon » Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:47 pm

This thread is now back to the "announcements of new uasyncio releases" mode. Please ask technical questions in separate threads, properly titled - after you searched the forum for existing discussions. Please ask non-technical questions in dedicated threads - after you read the existing material on the matter.
Awesome MicroPython list
Pycopy - A better MicroPython https://github.com/pfalcon/micropython
MicroPython standard library for all ports and forks - https://github.com/pfalcon/micropython-lib
More up to date docs - http://pycopy.readthedocs.io/

kevinkk525
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:02 pm

Re: uasyncio - asyncio-like cooperative multitasking framework for uPy

Post by kevinkk525 » Thu Dec 27, 2018 5:31 am

pfalcon wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:31 pm
make the default upip install of micropython-asyncio work with mainline MicroPython
mattyt, are you sure you knock on the right door? Did you read the post above at all? Did you read the links in it? There's a patch which needs to be merged to "make the default upip install of micropython-asyncio work with mainline MicroPython". You should implore to the maintainer of the mainline. And heck, the mainline has fallen into subpar maintenance, as discussed by the links above. I'm doing all what I can to continue development and improve the situation with the mainline too (raising questions, offering help with the maintenance, submitting patches). What are you doing to improve the situation?
At least we are not doing anything to make the situation worse. Putting a version on pypi that can't work on the mainline micropython (yet) is a very unhealthy and hostile move, further scattering the micropython environment and harming the community.
You can't demand mainline developers to implement the patch that you want to see by leveraging that the typical newbie to micropython will try to use your new uasyncio module from pypi which won't work on his mainline firmware build. So he gets frustrated and leaves micropython in the worst case. So why do that? It does not matter what you think about mainline, it is still the entry point to micropython.
What exactly are you doing that improves the micropython environment with this move?
You could have published your new version as micropython-uasyncio-dev and everyone would have been happy.

User avatar
mattyt
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:39 am

Re: uasyncio - asyncio-like cooperative multitasking framework for uPy

Post by mattyt » Tue Jan 08, 2019 10:58 am

pfalcon wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:31 pm
mattyt, are you sure you knock on the right door? Did you read the post above at all? Did you read the links in it?
Yes, I had read the entire sordid mess. I'm well aware that I'm "knocking on the door" of the person who just willfully broke mainline MicroPython. Again.

I'm going to have to take another group of fledgling MicroPython programmers and explain to them how to work around the issue you've created. I fail to understand how you think this is good for the community? Particularly since it would have taken little effort to avoid (by renaming the 'development' package of asyncio as discussed above).
pfalcon wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:31 pm
There's a patch which needs to be merged to "make the default upip install of micropython-asyncio work with mainline MicroPython". You should implore to the maintainer of the mainline.
Interesting point of view. I read that PR and Damien raised a reasonable objection to the change. Your responses since weren't particularly compelling.

Shouldn't the onus be on the person raising the PR to make a convincing case to integrate a change?
pfalcon wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:31 pm
And heck, the mainline has fallen into subpar maintenance, as discussed by the links above.
Just because the project isn't moving at the pace - or in the direction - that you want doesn't mean it's 'fallen into subpar maintenance'.
pfalcon wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:31 pm
I'm doing all what I can to continue development and improve the situation with the mainline too (raising questions, offering help with the maintenance, submitting patches).
I'm honestly and genuinely grateful for your contributions. Seriously; thanks Paul!
pfalcon wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:31 pm
What are you doing to improve the situation?
What does that have to do with anything? I do what I can. I apologise if you feel it's not enough. I would dearly love to contribute more.

In any case, I wasn't going to respond because doing so is exhausting and feels futile. You've made up your mind and seem unlikely to change. The only purpose of my response is that I think you should be aware that at least I feel that you've not acted in the best interest of this community with this decision. But c'est la vie.

Post Reply