[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bits from the Debian PyCon Hangout - /usr/bin/python



The odds of system management scripts I wrote a decade ago and haven't touched 
since living in a virtualenv is approximately zero.  The issue with switching 
where /usr/bin/python points to python3 is to avoid problems on systems.  I 
don't think virtualenv is relevant.  In any case, if you're using virtualenv, 
then you're enough of a Pythonista to be expected to know how it works.  That 
doesn't particularly bother me.

Scott K

On Wednesday, April 15, 2015 10:27:21 PM Thomas Kluyver wrote:
> It's worth mentioning that in virtualenvs and conda envs, where there can
> only be one version of Python installed, 'python' refers to that whether it
> is Python 3 or 2. So it's already not a safe assumption that 'python'
> always means Python 2, even if you discount Arch.
> 
> On 15 April 2015 at 21:04, Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> wrote:
> > 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:
> > https://lists.debian.org/403C6D4F-1E52-4E67-AA6A-5914D0BE87C9@kitterman.co
> > m


Reply to: