Filipe Laíns <la...@riseup.net> added the comment: I don't think the proposal is incompatible with what I discussed.
I haven't been super clear on my opinions on the implementation, so let me try to clarify them. - I think that we should use a static scheme, accessible on all platforms. - If this scheme needs to be independently defined for each platform, we should have different variants, available on all platforms, but still keep a generic named one, as an alias to the platform specific scheme - We should not be re-using/aliasing existing schemes, particularly ones that are prone to downstream patching So, my proposal would be to define a single static scheme, and changing the interpreter path initialization logic to hardcode its paths when on virtual environments. If this presents any issue, and requires the scheme to be different for different platforms, we should add platform specific schemes and make the main one an alias to the correct scheme. Hopefully that clarifies things up a bit. We should sort it out as soon as possible and update the PR, I don't think the PR as-is is the best approach. What do you think? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue45413> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
