On April 15, 2015 8:00:22 PM EDT, Barry Warsaw <ba...@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-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/403c6d4f-1e52-4e67-aa6a-5914d0be8...@kitterman.com
