[_paulc]

This lines up with my experience. Strangely I had someone submit a bunch of slightly passive-aggressive "Py3 support" pull requests to a couple of my repos which were basically the result of running 2to3 on the code. They hadn't even bothered to run the unit tests (which obviously failed spectacularly). It did however prompt me to get Py3 support working properly which was actually a good thing.

[iak8god]

> Strangely I had someone submit a bunch of slightly passive-aggressive "Py3 support" pull requests

Is there a more polite way to go about this? I submitted some "Py3 support"-style pull requests to a repo out of the blue a while back. In that case it was just a few minor changes to some fairly small scripts and I did those by hand, preserving Py2 compatibility. But I did wonder at the time whether it wasn't a bit jarring for the owner to see a stranger pop up with a bunch of pull requests like that.

[walrus]

> Is there a more polite way to go about this?

This is the usual process for submitting a large change to a project:

1. Check the issue tracker or mailing list for an existing discussion about Python 3 support. If there is one, read the discussion. If there isn't one, start the discussion. Mention that you're willing to make the changes if there is interest. Remember that supporting both Python 2 and Python 3 places a burden on all future contributors.

2. Keep the changes minimal and easy to review.

3. Review the changes yourself before sending a patch/pull request.

4. Run the test suite.

5. Test your changes in all versions of Python the software supports.

Forgetting #1 is usually the cause of tension when people submit large patches. The person who submits a patch wants to see their patch included. The authors of the project want to make sure it aligns with the goals of their project and doesn't break their software.