On Friday, May 18, 2018 11:31:37 AM Matthias Klose wrote: > On 18.05.2018 05:19, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > > [Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17] > > > >> PEP 394  saw an update in April 2018 , the diffs at . > >> > >> The most important change from my point of view is > >> > >> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the > >> - ``python2``/``python3`` convention, even in code that is not intended > >> to > >> +* It is strongly encouraged that distribution-specific packages use > >> ``python2`` + or ``python3`` rather than ``python``, even in code that > >> is not intended to>> > >> operate on other distributions. > > > > FTR: the day this PEP asks us to point /usr/bin/python to python3 is the > > day I start ignoring it, to say the least. > > > >> I don't think there is enough time to replace all python shebangs to > >> python2 in time for the buster release, however there is no harm in > >> starting this process now. > > > > too late, this process has already started (since dh_python2 v3.20180313) > > ;-P> > >> But I'd like to get this done for buster+1, in the case we still need to > >> ship a Python2/2.7, so that buster+1 doesn't ship with a python command, > >> but maybe with a python2 command. > > > > we already ship /usr/bin/python2. Removing /usr/bin/python makes sense > > as well (administrators can symlink it to whatever they want once it's > > gone from Debian), but... > > > >> The first step is to create a set of python2* packages in > >> python-defaults, with contain all the python2* symlinks, and having the > >> python* packages depend on those python2 packages. This change itself > >> is a no-op and shouldn't affect anything. > >> > >> As a second step change the dh_python2 (in python-defaults), and > >> dh-python to generate dependencies on python2 instead of python, and > >> replacing the shebang from python to python2. > >> > >> This should cover the majority of packages to replace dependencies on > >> python with dependencies on python2. There are packages which don't > >> check for python2, so these probably need adjustments. But again, the > >> goal for buster+1 is to ship as few Python2 dependent packages as > >> possible, if any. > > > > this is useless. What will we gain by renaming packages? > > who said, that we should rename packages? The only packages being dropped > are the python defaults packages. > > > I refuse to do that work! > > There is no work in renaming the packages. It's about the dependency > generation and the shebang. > > > The only message it sends is that we don't think /usr/bin/python or > > python package is Python 2.7 anymore and that's definitely not the > > message I want to send. > > No, that's not what the PEP says.
Upstream is free to follow Arch in their insanity (even if more slowly) and suggest pointing /usr/bin/python at a python3 version is a reasonable thing to do (eventually). It's not (and they even explain why in the PEP). Debian doesn't have to follow. We can have higher standards. I don't see any reason to be able to "apt install python2" instead of "apt install python". I think it's perfectly fine the way it is now where the same package provides /usr/bin/oython and /usr/bin/python2. If you exclude eventually pointint /usr/bin/python at a python3 version (and we should), then there's no value in doing it. I agree with Piotr. I don't think we need to "create a set of python2* packages". Scott K