> It seems to be a little bit more controversial what should happen to the 
> python
> command in the long term.  Some people argue that python should never point to
> python3, because it's incompatible,

> however Debian will have difficulties to
> explain that decision to users who start with Python3 and are not aware of 
> the 2
> to 3 transition.

can you explain this point? i think if a new developer starts with
python3 now (and i have plenty of examples at my company) they just
use `python3` on the commandline, shebangs, venv, etc. I dont see the
confusion we would create.

> So yes, in the long term, Debian should have a python command
> again.

I dont think that's the right decision. PEP 0394
(https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/) allows distribution not to
ship `python` at all:


* If the python command is installed, it is expected to invoke either
the same version of Python as the python3 command or as the python2
* Distributors may choose to set the behavior of the python command as follows:
** python2,
** python3,
** not provide python command,
** allow python to be configurable by an end user or a system administrator.

> One solution could be not to ship the python command in bullseye, forcing 
> users
> to adjust their local installations.

it is my opinion that that's what we should do: not ship `python` at
all and have users/packagers/developers use either python2 or python3
as needed, and not to reintroduce `python` at a later time.

Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Twitter: https://twitter.com/sandrotosi

Reply via email to