On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Mark Hammond <skippy.hamm...@gmail.com> wrote: > The launcher was slightly controversial when the pep was initially written > 12 months ago. If you believe the creation of the PEP was procedurally > incorrect I'm happy to withdraw it - obviously I just want the launcher, > with or without a PEP. Alternatively, if you think the format of the PEP > needs to change before it can be accepted, then I'm happy to do that too if > you can be very specific about what you want changed. If you mean something > else entirely then please be very specific - I admit I'm not clear on the > point of your message at all.
I think the PEP is appropriate, but some of the details that are currently embedded in the prose should be extracted out to a clear "specification" section: - two launcher binaries (one for .py files, one for .pyw) will be added to the system PATH - the launcher will be shipped as part of the default CPython windows installers (starting with Python 3.3) - the launcher will handle launching both Python 2 and Python 3 scripts - the launcher will be overwritten when upgrading CPython As a practical matter, it *may* be worth having the launcher available as an independent installer that just gets bundled with the CPython one, but that shouldn't be a requirement in the PEP. 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
