On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 2:48 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 27. 06. 19 18:49, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 12:06 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> So I might ask: What's the benefit of not having an unversioned python at all?
>>
> Avoiding ambiguity. Admittedly, it's avoiding large future pain at the
> cost of small-and-frequent current pain. I'm not sure it's Fedora's
> place to drive that mindset shift, particularly if upstream is taking
> the opposite approach.
To be fair, upstream allows us to choose. If we decide that we want "python"
command not to exists, it's a valid choice.
As Python maintainers, we want to make it python3. If Fedora decides that
removing it is a better way, we have the ability to do that.
I'd argue that it brings more problems. Such as: Should there also be no "pip",
no "pytest", no "pylint"... command? Or should we switch those to Python 3, but
just have no "python" command? What happens if users do "dnf install python"?
Should they get Python 3 or nothing? etc.
Either way, we really **need** "python" to no longer be Python 2. There are
still people "out there" who call Python 2 the "default Python" because that's
what you get when you type "python".
As an outsider to the Python community, not having any binary or package that responds to the expected name "python" would be a disaster.
-Dan
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
