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


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/536aa8fc.7030...@debian.org

Reply via email to