Using update-alternatives for /usr/bin provided binaries

[Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>]

Hi everyone in the Python list!

I've been working with Ben Finney on upgrading python-coverage to 3.7. I
believe the package was in good shape before the upload, at the
exception that /usr/bin/coverage isn't provided by the package. Ben
opened but #726255 to track the issue.

My proposal fix was this:

http://anonscm.debian.org/loggerhead/collab-maint/python-coverage/python-coverage.debian/revision/176

which uses update-alternatives, like I saw in other python packages (for
example, in waitress, and many others). Ben didn't agree with it, he
wrote to me on IRC that there is a "controversy" about it. He then
reverted my change, and I agree to not commit in his trunk anymore.

We both didn't want to hold the update of python-coverage which was
really overdue: the last upload was from 2012-05, and version 3.6
(required for many packages) was released early last January. So I went
ahead and sponsored the upload of python-coverage 3.7.

Though, #726255 still needs a resolution, and I would like to have the
view of other Python module maintainers. Is using update-alternatives
the way to go? Was my commit correct? Is there any other (better) way to
do things here?

Please let both Ben and I know your view.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)