On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> The point is, some people also use venvs. In a world of Python 3 only,
> some upstream will continue to use /usr/bin/python (IMO, rightly). We
> should be able to provide a default implementation for these scripts.
I think this is a bug
On 11/07/2016 04:21 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, November 07, 2016 10:08:25 AM Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> On Nov 07, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>> So, I don't agree with you, and believe that gradually using
>>> #!/usr/bin/python2 is a good approach to the transition. IMO,
On Monday, November 07, 2016 10:08:25 AM Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Nov 07, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >So, I don't agree with you, and believe that gradually using
> >#!/usr/bin/python2 is a good approach to the transition. IMO, that's
> >what we should start doing as much as
On Nov 07, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>So, I don't agree with you, and believe that gradually using
>#!/usr/bin/python2 is a good approach to the transition. IMO, that's
>what we should start doing as much as possible.
>
>If the dependencies for Python itself aren't calculated well
On 11/01/2016 11:03 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 01, 2016 05:14:21 PM Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> On Nov 01, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> I don't think /usr/bin/python should ever point to a python3 version. It
>>> should be dropped when python2.7 is removed. I
On Nov 02, 2016, at 01:57 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
>Donald Stufft writes:
>
>> /usr/bin/python3 being Python 4.x is a bit weird though
>
>Seriously? Who is proposing that?
>
>> and it’s likely that Python 4.x is not going to be another break the
>> world release.
>
>Certainly
Donald Stufft writes:
> /usr/bin/python3 being Python 4.x is a bit weird though
Seriously? Who is proposing that?
> and it’s likely that Python 4.x is not going to be another break the
> world release.
Certainly the command ‘python3’ should only ever point to the Python 3
On November 1, 2016 8:43:50 PM EDT, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
>> On Nov 1, 2016, at 6:03 PM, Scott Kitterman
>wrote:
>>
>> Even after python2.7 is removed from Debian, there will still be
>users who
>> keep a local copy because they couldn't migrate
> On Nov 1, 2016, at 6:03 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> Even after python2.7 is removed from Debian, there will still be users who
> keep a local copy because they couldn't migrate things due to $REASONS. Re-
> using /usr/bin/python for a python3 version won't
On Tuesday, November 01, 2016 05:14:21 PM Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Nov 01, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >I don't think /usr/bin/python should ever point to a python3 version. It
> >should be dropped when python2.7 is removed. I think the existence of
> >/usr/bin/python2 is a
On Nov 01, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>I don't think /usr/bin/python should ever point to a python3 version. It
>should be dropped when python2.7 is removed. I think the existence of
>/usr/bin/python2 is a limited to a work around for a specific distros
>insanity. There's no
On November 1, 2016 10:28:01 AM EDT, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>Over in #834193, a user is asking for a /usr/bin/pip2 to mirror
>/usr/bin/pip
>because some uses cases apparently prefer pip2 over pip. That seems
>like a
>reasonable request on the face of it, and easy to support.
>
Over in #834193, a user is asking for a /usr/bin/pip2 to mirror /usr/bin/pip
because some uses cases apparently prefer pip2 over pip. That seems like a
reasonable request on the face of it, and easy to support.
However, I thought, well why not shebang pip2 to /usr/bin/python2 because 1)
it would
13 matches
Mail list logo