Ian Denhardt (2014-10-30 20:05 +0300) wrote: > Quoting Alex Kost (2014-10-30 03:27:59) >> As both python packages can co-exist in one profile, either python-2… >> may be renamed into “python2” or python-3… into “python3”. As python3 >> is the future, I think it would be better to have “python2” and “python” >> (which is python3) packages. Or maybe they shouldn't be renamed and we >> can introduce a little collision instead by adding "…/bin/python" >> symlink to python-3… package. > > Speaking as someone who's been on a distro that has python 3 as the > default since 2.7 came out, and being a professional python developer > working on codebases that often don't work on python 3, I don't really > consider this a sensible default. I often have a symlink ahead of the > system python binary in my path that points to python2. More > importantly, I think it should be tunable. I *do* sometimes make use of > having both available.
This is what you currently have: you can install both, and "python" would be a link to "python2". But installing 2 packages with the same name is not intended (to prevent file names collision), so I think it would be better to rename one of the pythons into "python2"/"python3". -- Alex
