Re: alternative for python
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> I know that some packages might not yet ship extensions built for 2.5,
> but still, since lenny is targetting python >= 2.5, and unstable is
> unstable, why don't we allow users to experiment a bit and change
> default python on their systems to python2.5? (yeah yeah -- they could
> probably simply ln -sf python2.5 /usr/bin/python, but that is not the
> point, since alternatives are there to provide such facility)
Because if we allow that, then we must be able to support such changes.
And we don't.
If you want to experiment, overwrite temporarily the symlink. If we let
people change the symlink, and if it breaks, then it's a bug in our
packaging and we have to fix it.
And it's far easier to package everything while knowing that python is a
a single python version (identified by the corresponding python package).
> In any case -- I just wanted to raise a concern and may be some
> discussion -- may be I should simply a wishlist bug against python?
No. The situation is fine as is. No need to introduce more complexity.
I pushed for such a change in perl a long time ago, and we're back to a
single perl version... let's not reiterate the mistake for python.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Reply to: