On April 15, 2015 8:00:22 PM EDT, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:
>On Apr 15, 2015, at 04:42 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>>Then I don't understand why the whole s/python/python2// plan in the
>shebangs
>>helps anything. As long as both exist, it's a no-op.
>
>Partly this is to begin to educate users to stop using /usr/bin/python,
>which
>has unclear semantics across the wider Python community. If users see
>distro
>installed scripts use /usr/bin/python2, and PEP 394 says to use it,
>they will
>switch over and in time (e.g. by 2020) the impact of removing
>/usr/bin/python
>will be greatly lessened.
>
>>P.S. It would be nice if there would be a PEP that says to never ever
>do
>>this. I know it would make Arch have a sad, but they'll get over it.
>
>PEP 394 is the vehicle for this, and getting the Debian and Fedora
>ecosystems
>aligned will be a powerful force for making sure it says what we want
>it to
>say.
PEP-394 is very weak in my opinion. All it says is we aren't ready to break existing systems yet, but we probably will in the future. I think it's better not to do that period.
Scott K
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: [🔎] 403C6D4F-1E52-4E67-AA6A-5914D0BE87C9@kitterman.com" target="_blank">https://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 403C6D4F-1E52-4E67-AA6A-5914D0BE87C9@kitterman.com