On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 05:38:20PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote: > --) Two scripts still have "/usr/bin/python" lines > (python/auxiliar/manuals_definitions.py, and scripts/build/pytt.py). > Those should be changed to "@PYTHON@", right?
python/ yes, since it's not something that people call manually. But stuff in scripts/build/ shouldn't have @PYTHON@, otherwise it'll bork if you call it manually. > Would it be feasible to use "#!/usr/bin/env @PYTHON@" or > "#!/usr/bin/env @TARGET_PYTHON@" for all Python scripts, using the > basename of the appropriate Python executable in place of the Make > variables? > > Any thoughts about this? I absolutely refuse to believe that we're the first project to be faced with this difficulty. I also do not believe, with no disrespect to anybody here, that we are the most knowledgeable+intelligent people to be considering this problem. Find out what the python people recommend. Find out what distributions recommend. Find out what packaging guides recommend. Somewhere on the internet, there will be a blog post by Guido van Rossum, or a policy document for ubuntu packagers, or something like that. It will contain the perfect solution to "how should we start our python scripts", or "how can we survive the transition to python 3", and the like. Or if there is no perfect solution, then at least it will outline the flaws and tradeoffs of each possibility. Remember the old saying in academia -- "you can save yourself the burden of spending 3 hours in the library by spending 3 months in the lab". Let's not reinvent the wheel here. Find out what the experts recommend, then let's do that. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
