> 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 work in dh-python is not trivial. The work needed in thousands of
packages (all Python related packages build depend on python{,-dev} or
python-all{,-dev} is not as well. Rebuilding all binary packages means
even more work (${python:Depends} is not always the only dependency)…
and that's only a work in Debian. There are lots of packages outside
Debian that will need to be updated… for what purpose exactly?
To make it easier to propose later python2-foo binary package rename,
like Fedora did?

> > 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.

not yet. We all know that it will happen sooner or later, though.

How about creating DEP-394 with a strong message that we have default
Python 2.X and default Python 3.X interpreters and once 2.X will be
gone. Python 3 will NOT become default Python 2.X?
GPG: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

Reply via email to