On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 12:45:24PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > But what's the benefit of alternatives for this? Is the intent to provide > sysadmins a way to change which python version of an app would be the system > default? > > If not, why not just pick what we want to be the default for each app, and use > a plain old symlink in packages to point to it? Changing what we want to be > the default would require package updates anyway, and it seems to me that > alternatives just complicates things and provides people a way to shoot > themselves in the foot, e.g prevent that default change from happening when > that package update lands (in addition to changing it at will without any > package updates in question) which might not be a good thing. Additionally, I think alternatives would only work for exactly the scripts that I think don't need to have a python2 and python3 version. ie: The scripts that do exactly the same thing whether they're run via pythn2 or python3. AFAICS, we should just have those scripts/packages choose to install the python2 version xor the python3 version. The end user gets no visible changes (except maybe different bugswhich we are supposed to just fix). In cases where the two scripts do different things, alternatives shouldn't be used anyway. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpgmiEIga0qe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
