> It seems to be a little bit more controversial what should happen to the > python > command in the long term. Some people argue that python should never point to > python3, because it's incompatible,
> however Debian will have difficulties to > explain that decision to users who start with Python3 and are not aware of > the 2 > to 3 transition. can you explain this point? i think if a new developer starts with python3 now (and i have plenty of examples at my company) they just use `python3` on the commandline, shebangs, venv, etc. I dont see the confusion we would create. > So yes, in the long term, Debian should have a python command > again. I dont think that's the right decision. PEP 0394 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/) allows distribution not to ship `python` at all: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/#for-python-runtime-distributors * If the python command is installed, it is expected to invoke either the same version of Python as the python3 command or as the python2 command. * Distributors may choose to set the behavior of the python command as follows: ** python2, ** python3, ** not provide python command, ** allow python to be configurable by an end user or a system administrator. > One solution could be not to ship the python command in bullseye, forcing > users > to adjust their local installations. it is my opinion that that's what we should do: not ship `python` at all and have users/packagers/developers use either python2 or python3 as needed, and not to reintroduce `python` at a later time. Regards, -- Sandro "morph" Tosi My website: http://sandrotosi.me/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi Twitter: https://twitter.com/sandrotosi