> On Dec 3, 2014, at 9:51 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > - (This is not really related to the switch, but more of a general remark) 
> > In [4], it says that "python 3 version of the executable gains a python3- 
> > prefix". This is IMO bad, since upstream projects tend to name the 
> > versioned binaries "foo-3.4, foo-3" or "foo3.4, foo3". We should accept one 
> > of these - I'm not really certain which one of them. I tried to discuss 
> > this several times on distutils-sig mailing list, but without reaching a 
> > consensus. Either way, prefixing with python3- doesn't make sense to me, 
> > because it's not similar to any upstream way and you don't find the 
> > binaries under their names using tab completion (e.g. foo<tab> doesn't tell 
> > you about python3-foo).
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> CPython & pip use the "foo3.4, foo3" convention, so that seems enough of a 
> reason to use that convention by default. We may want a "unless upstream does 
> it differently" caveat though.
> 
It doesn't really matter right now but long term I think python packaging 
should just natively support commands like this. Either just as a matter of 
fact, opt in, or by allowing templated command names. Either way I think the 
upstream tooling should and likely will follow python's lead for how these are 
written. 
_______________________________________________
python-devel mailing list
python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel

Reply via email to