[Python-3000] [Python-ideas] Namespaces are one honking greatidea -- let's do more of those!

[Robert Brewer]

Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2008 6:55 AM,  <skip at pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >     Georg> I would prefer a "python3" alias analogous to the current
> >     Georg> "python" alias, at least as long as Python 2.x is still
in
> >     Georg> wide use.
> >
> > So, "make install" would install a python3.0 executable and make
> > python3 a symlink.  Makes sense to me. "make bdfl-install" could
> > also create a symlink to python3 called "python". ;-)
> >
> > Anybody who installed multiple versions of Python on their computer
> > today - at least in the Unixoid world - already has to know about
> > "make altinstall" so they don't accidentally obliterate the python
> > symlink.  I don't understand what all the fuss is.
> 
> Me neither. If you don't want to type "python3.0" why not create a
> shell alias?

We just went through this with CherryPy 3, and I wish we had used
"cherrypy3" as the package name. Granted, that's a library and not an
executable, so the biggest benefit (fewer import conflicts with a new
name) doesn't really apply to Python. But there are other benefits to
"python3". You can read code examples and work with users much more
easily, saving a lot of emails in the cycle: "what version are you
using?"; "dunno--how do I find out?". We're looking at several years of
people mistakenly trying to run 2.x code on 3.x and vice-versa. That
doesn't vanish completely; there will still be minor releases, but those
are supposed to be more backward-compatible.

I'd like to hear from e.g. the sqlite3 folks about similar experiences.


Robert Brewer
fumanchu at aminus.org