I think that it's a good idea to not only state that python should be Python 2, but also that python2 should be implemented and that scripts should specify it, to provide redundancy and handle distros that won't or have not yet switched back to the python -> python2 convention. I've . In any event, I do agree that there needs to be a clear standard coming from the Python community. Should I submit a PEP for this? I'm also going to talk to the Arch devs and ask them to follow these proposed standards (or at least to allow python to be user-switchable). Thanks, Kerrick Staley
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:15 PM, James Y Knight <f...@fuhm.net> wrote: > > On Mar 1, 2011, at 5:06 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Eric Smith <e...@trueblade.com> wrote: > >> On 3/1/2011 4:19 PM, Kerrick Staley wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello, > >>> There is a need for the default Python2 install to place a symlink at > >>> /usr/bin/python2 that points to /usr/bin/python, or for the > >>> documentation to recommend that packagers ensure that python2 is > >>> defined. Also, all documentation should be changed to recommend that > >>> "#!/usr/bin/env python2" be used as the shebang for Python 2 scripts. > >>> This is needed because some distributions (Arch Linux, in particular), > >>> point /usr/bin/python to /usr/bin/python3, while others (including > >>> Slackware, Debian, and the BSDs, probably more) do not even define the > >>> python2 command. This means that a script has no way of achieving > >>> cross-platform compatibility. The point at which many distributions > >>> begin to alias /usr/bin/python to /usr/bin/python3 is due soon, and for > >>> the next couple of years, it would be best to use a python2 or python3 > >>> shebang in all scripts, making no assumptions about plain python, which > >>> should only be invoked interactively. This email from about 3 years ago > >>> seems relevant: : > >>> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2008-March/012421.html > >>> Again, this issue needs to be addressed by the Python developers > >>> themselves so that different *nix distributions will handle it > >>> consistently, allowing Python scripts to continue to be cross-platform. > >>> > >> > >> I believe we agreed at the language summit last year (or maybe even the > year > >> before) that "python" would always be python2.x, and "python3" would be > >> python3.x. > >> > >> And by "always" we indeed meant forever. To do otherwise would break > scripts > >> even many, many years from now. > > > > Unfortunately distros are not following these guidelines. As long as > > we still have the pythonX.Y links I think it's better to have > > "python2", "python3" and "python" than total anarchy. > > If python upstream would make it clear that that *IS* the policy, distros > might follow it. Right now, there is no clear guidance, as far as I can > tell. If you do not want distros making python be a link to python3, please > say so loudly, preferably on a webpage on python.org that users can point > the distros to. > > James > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mail%40kerrickstaley.com >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
