Mathieu Bridon <bochecha@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. I agree. From an emotional point of view I fully understand the Python folks' desire to have "Python" mean Python 3, and that's fine in marketing contexts such as websites. But filenames and package names are technical identifiers. They must be chosen so that they'll fulfil their functions, and with consideration for forward and backward compatibility. Providing an unversioned "python" serves only to lure incautious programmers into using it where they should use a versioned name. Björn Persson
Attachment:
pgpCl2BH4z9av.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
