RE: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

manage.py call python3 instead of python? but python3 manage.py doesn't work on windows, right? On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:17 PM, Josh Smeaton <josh.smea...@gmail.com<mailto:josh.smea...@gmail.com>> wrote: As a datapoint, I've seen roughly 1 person per week in #django IRC confused ab

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

but python3 manage.py doesn't work on windows, right? On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:17 PM, Josh Smeaton wrote: > As a datapoint, I've seen roughly 1 person per week in #django IRC > confused about specific startup exceptions due to them using python 2 > rather than python

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

As a datapoint, I've seen roughly 1 person per week in #django IRC confused about specific startup exceptions due to them using python 2 rather than python 3 on Django >= 2.0. Unsure how many of these are due to the shebang. That said, it looks like there are no good solutions other than maybe

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

In any case you’re going to see a lot of Django 2.0 developers on Mac OS hit this problem when they install to default Python or use standard Python install convention where Python 3.5 is installed as “python3". -bobby > On Apr 10, 2018, at 3:46 PM, Aymeric Augustin >

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

> On 10 Apr 2018, at 17:43, Florian Apolloner wrote: > > On Tuesday, April 10, 2018 at 1:28:33 PM UTC+2, Tim Allen wrote: > Since `django-admin startproject my_project` is created on the fly from > templates, couldn't we dynamically create the `manage.py` executable based

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

On Tuesday, April 10, 2018 at 1:28:33 PM UTC+2, Tim Allen wrote: > > Since `django-admin startproject my_project` is created on the fly from > templates, couldn't we dynamically create the `manage.py` executable based > on some system introspection and an agreed upon priority > Wouldn't that

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

Since `django-admin startproject my_project` is created on the fly from templates, couldn't we dynamically create the `manage.py` executable based on some system introspection and an agreed upon priority? Regards, Tim On Tuesday, April 10, 2018 at 4:28:12 AM UTC-4, Adam Johnson wrote: > > Oh

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

Oh yeah, duh, my bad :) On 9 April 2018 at 23:35, Collin Anderson wrote: > I'm thinking something like #!/usr/bin/env {{ os.path.basename(sys.executable) > }} when running startproject. (Though on windows I that would > be #!/usr/bin/env python.exe - not sure if that would

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

I'm thinking something like #!/usr/bin/env {{ os.path.basename(sys.executable) }} when running startproject. (Though on windows I that would be #!/usr/bin/env python.exe - not sure if that would work or not) On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Adam Johnson wrote: > (Or would it work

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

> > (Or would it work to use os.path.basename(sys.executable) ?) The shebang is interpreted by the OS so this is before python even starts :) On 9 April 2018 at 20:53, Collin Anderson wrote: > I personally just edit my manage.py to change it from python to python3. >

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

I personally just edit my manage.py to change it from python to python3. Maybe we could just document that? (Or would it work to use os.path.basename(sys.executable) ?) On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 11:02 AM, Tom Forbes wrote: > It may be an obstacle but I believe it’s better than

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

It may be an obstacle but I believe it’s better than having them nuke their base systems by accident by installing a package that conflicts with their base system. This isn’t such a huge issue on MacOS but on Linux it is and I’ve seen it happen a few times. Not to mention the issue of multiple

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

I never really liked the idea of using VirtualEnv or HomeBrew over the default installation in Mac OS. (FreeBSD has the same naming issues). Having beginners use VirtualEnv or HomeBrew always struck me as a huge obstacle to getting a beginners Django developer's environment operational, as

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

This only seems to be an issue when you are using the base system interpreter to run manage.py. installing Django and other dependencies there is not recommended for a variety of reasons, and this isn't a problem when using a virtualenv, it doesn't seem like there is much to fix IMO. On Sun, 8

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

Is it OK to reopen that ticket? The problem is that python2 and python3 need to coexist in most systems, and you can’t just rename python3 to python. -bobby > On Apr 6, 2018, at 8:30 PM, Tim Graham wrote: > > It was tried in https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27878

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

It was tried in https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27878 but it caused problems, particularly on Windows. On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 6:35:50 PM UTC-4, Josh Smeaton wrote: > > I think you're right and PEP394 is the relevant text: > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/ > > TL;DR > > For

Re: Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

I think you're right and PEP394 is the relevant text: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/ TL;DR For now, *python* should refer to python2 and *python3* should be used to refer to python 3. On Saturday, 7 April 2018 07:07:35 UTC+10, Bobby Mozumder wrote: > > The header of manage.py has:

Shouldn't manage.py call python3 instead of python?

The header of manage.py has: #!/usr/bin/env python Shoudn’t it be: #!/usr/bin/env python3 Since 2.0 is now only Python3. Both my Mac OS & FreeBSD environments have Python 3.5+ as “python3". (I’m not sure about Linux or other environments). Is that a bug I need to file? -bobby -- You