On Mon, Dec 8, 2014, at 09:09 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 11:12:50AM +0100, Martin Kolman wrote: > > > At a high level, I think this is a good architectural match; both > > > programs are Python 2, etc. > > Do they have a Python 3 version/support as well ? We are in the process > > of dropping Python 2 only dependencies (pyblock, urlrgrabber, etc.) so > > that Anaconda can run with Python 3, as a needed by the Fedora 22 > > "Python 3 as Default" system-wide change[0]. So adding new Python 2 only > > dependencies would not make much sense. > > Yes — cloud-init is part of the python3 change, and there's a 2→3 patch > at https://code.launchpad.net/~harlowja/cloud-init/py2-3 We're getting off into 2 → 3 architecture, but at least for Atomic, I am committed to shipping Python 2 on the host system for "a long time"[1] due to Ansible ( http://docs.ansible.com/faq.html#how-do-i-handle-python-pathing-not-having-a-python-2-x-in-usr-bin-python-on-a-remote-machine ) It injects Python (2) programs from remote machines onto the target. In that case, Python 3 would basically mean I have to carry both. That plus non-packaged custom scripts makes it look like to me the only realistic outcome of this push is going to be both on the majority of non-minimal/embedded systems. Which doesn't mean it's a fundamentally bad idea. Maybe just change the term "switching" on the change page to "add". [1] No formal commitment on timeframe, it was a verbal agreement with a major consumer of the OS, but if I had to handwave this, "long time" = "RHEL major version". _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
