Greg Ewing writes: > Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > I don't see any need to shorten "python3.0" to "python3". > > I was thinking that "python3" would be the 3.x series > equivalent of what "python" is now, i.e. installation > of 3.0 would create links called "python3.0" and (unless > you're doing altinstall) also "python3".
Well, yes, I understood that. I just don't see a need for it. At any given time I have a preferred Python, and I alias python to that. When I need one of the others, I invoke them as "pythonX.Y". Even on a shared system, most people will be allowed to have a private ~/bin directory or shell aliases. > > Also, another exception should be if there is no other Python > > installed. Then installing a link at "python" should be OK. > > Until you subsequently go to install one of the 2.x > versions. If somebody's introduction to Python is Python 3, I don't see why they'd want to go back except for a specific app. It *is* a better language than Python 2 or Python 1. Such an app will have an appropriate shebang or wrapper script. That doesn't mean that it would be *bad* if they want to go back, that's entirely up to them. I just think it will be rare enough that they can ask somebody how to create a symlink if they need to. _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
