Am 07.11.2010 15:57, schrieb James Y Knight:
> On Nov 6, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> So I don't recall a decision that there shouldn't be a python2
>> binary,
>
> The decision to make one would have to be an active decision, since
> Python has never installed one before. If there
On Nov 6, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> So I don't recall a decision that there shouldn't be a python2
> binary,
The decision to make one would have to be an active decision, since Python has
never installed one before. If there should be one, then the Python Makefile
should make on
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 11:41 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> Instead, I recall that a decision was made (and I'm not sure whether
> with consensus or not) that "make install" would install
> /usr/bin/python3, for the time being. Period.
Indeed, that's my recollection as well. Whether python3 ever
On 11/6/2010 8:53 AM, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
Experience teaches us that people do speak up more than they tend to
keep schtum. We do get feedback on most things, including the "NO
ARCH" rule.
It strikes me as reasonable to warn people that they would be wasting
their time typing out a mul
> But the previous consensus (at least, as I, and presumably many other
> people understood it) was that python2 would remain the owner of the
> name "/usr/bin/python" for the indefinite future, and python3 would
> be invoked with /usr/bin/python3.
Can you cite references for that (not that other
I'm sorry you feel that way.
Experience teaches us that people do speak up more than they tend to
keep schtum. We do get feedback on most things, including the "NO
ARCH" rule. At least so far, responses have not been anywhere near
what you'd expect if you'd tell people to "RTFM n00b" (in terms of
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Michael Foord
wrote:
> On 05/11/2010 17:10, geremy condra wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Laurens Van Houtven
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> What is true is that there's a new and temporary "NO ARCH
Whoops, pressed send too soon. This should've followed my previous email:
Unscientifically judging by the rate of people who used to have vague
problems that turned out to be Arch-related, I don't really think
anyone feels they're being told to "get lost". People ask a question
about it, which is
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:10 PM, geremy condra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
>
>
>
>> What is true is that there's a new and temporary "NO ARCH" rule in the
>> topic
>
> It's your channel and you can do w
On 05/11/2010 17:10, geremy condra wrote:
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
What is true is that there's a new and temporary "NO ARCH" rule in the
topic
It's your channel and you can do with it what you want,
Ac
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> What is true is that there's a new and temporary "NO ARCH" rule in the
> topic
It's your channel and you can do with it what you want, but seriously-
does this strike you as the b
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 17:09, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Thomas Wouters writes:
>
> > > This is unrealistic. It would seriously annoy Arch's intended
> > > audience. (Eg, recently I've become a lot more favorable to using
> > > Word instead of OOo because Word doesn't pop up a useless warni
Thomas Wouters writes:
> > This is unrealistic. It would seriously annoy Arch's intended
> > audience. (Eg, recently I've become a lot more favorable to using
> > Word instead of OOo because Word doesn't pop up a useless warning
> > every time I save a .doc file.) Practically speaking, it w
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2010/11/4 Nick Coghlan :
>> Tools also had a few discrepancies:
>> scripts/2to3.py: /usr/bin/env python (necessary, I think - I believe
>> 2to3 is a 2.x only program)
>
> No, I believe distutils is supposed to patch that up, though.
Yea
On 05/11/10 18:47, Thomas Wouters wrote:
No, that's not my point at all. The problem isn't that Python 3 is
incompatible with Python 2. The problem is that stuff broke without
(apparently) fair warning.
Just to clarify (and going way off topic for this list...), this was
discussed on the Arc
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 01:43, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Thomas Wouters writes:
>
> > To clarify (but I dont speak for the rest of #python, just myself), I
> think
> > the move was premature, but I don't use Arch and I don't know what
> typical
> > Arch users expect.
>
> All of the Arch users
On 05/11/10 11:20, Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/11/10 05:44, Allan McRae wrote:
The second case was particularly interesting. These software would
change some of their #! to point at the python2 symlink and leave the
rest pointing at python. Note that p
James Y Knight wrote:
But the previous consensus (at least, as I, and presumably many other
people understood it) was that python2 would remain the owner of the
name "/usr/bin/python" for the indefinite future, and python3 would
be invoked with /usr/bin/python3.
Given that, it's not at all clea
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/11/10 05:44, Allan McRae wrote:
> The second case was particularly interesting. These software would
> change some of their #! to point at the python2 symlink and leave the
> rest pointing at python. Note that python-2.7 itself falls into this
On Nov 4, 2010, at 8:43 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> All of the Arch users I know expect Arch to occasionally do radical
> things because they're the right things to do in the long run.
But the previous consensus (at least, as I, and presumably many other people
understood it) was that pytho
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> I also agree with the "NO ARCH" topic at the moment. I was fairly surprised
> so many people went to #python for help given we had made news posts and had
> a topic in our IRC channel pointing to how to start fixing issues.
>
> Allan
I don't re
Thomas Wouters writes:
> To clarify (but I dont speak for the rest of #python, just myself), I think
> the move was premature, but I don't use Arch and I don't know what typical
> Arch users expect.
All of the Arch users I know expect Arch to occasionally do radical
things because they're the
On 05/11/10 08:40, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
According to #python, we are all idiots
I realize this is not really what your message was about and for sake
of brevity you used a bit of a hyperbole, but like Thomas I would
still like to ni
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> According to #python, we are all idiots
I realize this is not really what your message was about and for sake
of brevity you used a bit of a hyperbole, but like Thomas I would
still like to nip in right there. #python is a pretty big channe
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 21:12, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > As for #python, well, we got this storm of people utterly confused about
> > how their stuff doesn't work anymore, and putting the blame in the wrong
> > place. I don't think a distribution should ever cause that (even though
> > many do
On 04.11.2010 21:12, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
To clarify (but I dont speak for the rest of #python, just myself), I
think the move was premature, but I don't use Arch and I don't know what
typical Arch users expect. The reason I think it's premature is that
'python2' just doesn't work everywhere,
> To clarify (but I dont speak for the rest of #python, just myself), I
> think the move was premature, but I don't use Arch and I don't know what
> typical Arch users expect. The reason I think it's premature is that
> 'python2' just doesn't work everywhere, and I would have gone for a
> transitio
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 05:44, Allan McRae wrote:
> According to #python, we are all idiots
>
To clarify (but I dont speak for the rest of #python, just myself), I think
the move was premature, but I don't use Arch and I don't know what typical
Arch users expect. The reason I think it's prema
On Nov 04, 2010, at 11:33 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> world: /usr/bin/env python (I have no idea what this script is even for)
It's basically a front-end to ISO 3166 country codes. IOW, it prints the
expansion of top-level domain names and can do some reverse lookups too.
E.g.
% Tools/world/worl
On Nov 04, 2010, at 02:44 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>While this is not strictly related to python development, I thought that
>developers of python might be interested in some of the lessons provided by
>this. So forgive me if this is really wrong for this list...
>
>Recently Arch Linux did a big tra
2010/11/4 Nick Coghlan :
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> The second case was particularly interesting. These software would change
>> some of their #! to point at the python2 symlink and leave the rest pointing
>> at python. Note that python-2.7 itself falls into this cat
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 23:33:38 +1000
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Tools also had a few discrepancies:
> scripts/2to3.py: /usr/bin/env python (necessary, I think - I believe
> 2to3 is a 2.x only program)
> scripts/gprof2html.py: /usr/bin/env python32.3 (Huh? Automated
> correction gone wrong, perhaps?)
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> The second case was particularly interesting. These software would change
> some of their #! to point at the python2 symlink and leave the rest pointing
> at python. Note that python-2.7 itself falls into this category as many
> files in /usr/
Hi,
While this is not strictly related to python development, I thought that
developers of python might be interested in some of the lessons provided
by this. So forgive me if this is really wrong for this list...
Recently Arch Linux did a big transition with respect to python. Now we
suppo
34 matches
Mail list logo
