Re: favouring Python3 in the Debian policy
Am 07.05.2014 23:01, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
>>>> + <p><enumlist> + <item> + <p> + Applications should use
>>>> Python3, and should not be + packaged for Python2 as well. +
>>>> </p>
>
>>> Maybe also that system scripts written in Python should be Python 3 and
>>> not Python 2. I'd add the clarity just because I'm not sure folks
>>> think of such system scripts as "applications".
>
>> proposing a separate item.
>
>> <p> Command line scripts, packaging tools, tools used by Debian outside
>> the archive, etc. should use Python3, and should not be packaged for
>> Python2. </p>
>
> I don't think scripts "outside the archive" are in scope for the python
> policy;
thas was "tools outside the archive". Debian has some infrastructure written
in Python. I don't know if all of this is packaged and available in the archive.
> and I don't think this is what Barry was referring to. I think he meant
> python commandline programs, which some people may not think of as being
> "applications"?
sure, is "commandline programs" clearer than "Command line scripts"?
> FWIW, while I think getting the python policy to recommend Python3 is a
> good step forward, I think it's more important that we make sure the base
> system is leading by example. As described on debian-devel[1], there seem
> to be some porting blockers before we can migrate from python to python3 in
> the standard install.
This is independent. Getting these issues fixed is a dead-end for any other
migration of packages to Python3 (well, maybe except for OpenStack). There is
no reason for package maintainers to convert to Python3 for other packages.
Matthias
Reply to: