On Fri, 2017-07-28 at 21:06 +0200, Till Maas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:29:12PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > > It's only /usr/bin/python itself that still presents an unsolved > > problem, since the status quo (not providing it at all) is even > > more user hostile than pointing it at a modern version of Python 3 > > that > > Why is not providing /usr/bin/python more use hostile? Why is it > better for any script to use /usr/bin/python instead of > /usr/bin/python3? Exactly. By default, any script using `#!/usr/bin/zsh` won't work on Fedora, until the admin installs zsh. We could very well consider that /usr/bin/python remains python2, and not have it installed by default. To be honest, given how much energy is spent on this migration for a very low gain, it makes me feel like having an unversioned "python" (whether as package or executable names) was a mistake we should let disappear with Python 2. If everything is a versioned pythonX in the future, moving to a hypothetical Python 4 would only imply building new python4-* packages and changing the (Build)Requires, no gymnastic with unversioned things. -- Mathieu _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
