On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote: > I don't think it would be good (or necessary) to split this into a separate > PEP. PyCon (sprints or language summit) would be a good place to talk about > this.
Sure. With a PEP to record decisions this time, we shouldn't get a repeat of the last naming discussion where >> I believe the only remaining decision to be made is whether we >> actually change the "make install" command and the Mac OS X installers >> for Python 2.7.2, or leave them alone and tell the distro folks to fix >> it on their side of the fence. My own vote is a +1 for both, since >> changing "make install" is fairly easy, and Ronald indicated earlier >> in the thread that not only is the change to the Mac OS X installer >> pretty trivial, but that Apple are likely to follow the lead of >> whatever our default installer does. >> > > Martin has also indicated that making appropriate changes to the Windows > installer would not be difficult if we agree that changing the 2.7 > maintenance branch in this way is appropriate. True, it's only the more exotic ideas (like trying to do something about the PYTHON* variables or file associations) that become an issue. Simply supporting having a python3 version and a python2 version on PATH at the same time could work by duplicating the main executables (using "python2w" and "python3w" for the non-console variants), with the sysadmin effectively choosing the preferred version of the installed versions based on the directory order in PATH. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
