On Mar 03, 2011, at 09:55 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
I don't really mind adding /usr/bin/python2 symlink just to clean Arch mess, but I do mind changing /usr/bin/python to point to python3 (and I can use the same argument - "Explicit is better than implicit" - if you need Python 3, say so in the shebang, right?). What I'm afraid of is when we'll add /usr/bin/python2, we'll start getting a lot of scripts that will have to be checked manually every time new upstream version is released because we cannot assume what upstream author is using at given point.
If /usr/bin/python will be disallowed in shebangs on the other hand (and all scripts will use /usr/bin/python2, /usr/bin/python3, /usr/bin/python4 or /usr/bin/python2.6 etc.) I don't see a problem with letting administrators choose /usr/bin/python (right now not only changing it from python2.X to python3.X will break the system but also changing it from /usr/bin/pytohn2.X to /usr/bin/python2.Y will break it, and believe me, I know what I'm talking about (one of the guys at work did something like this once))
[all IMHO, dunno if other Debian's python-defaults maintainers agree with me]
This all seems reasonable to me, except that I think it would be good at some point -- which might be in several years -- to point /usr/bin/python to python3. We are not there now, but I do think we will be there one day. I also don't think we have to worry about a Python 4. I'm skeptical it will ever happen, because really, how many big warts in Python 3 do you think we'll need to break in a backward incompatible way? If it does, and history holds true, it'll be 15 years from now. Then all you whippersnappers can do whatever you like. :) -Barry