yes. everybody is doing this right but Arch. python3 has to be available but has to treated as a different language.
On Tuesday, 11 September 2012 12:09:19 UTC-5, LightDot wrote: > > I have been running python and python3 packages side by side on Fedora > ever since python 3 came out. I'm sure all bigger distros have this taken > care of in a similar way... I was curious so I took a look: > > - Debian has 2.x as 'python' and 3.x as 'python3' > - Fedora has 2.x as 'python' and 3.x as 'python3' > - Ubuntu has 2.x as 'python' and 3.x as 'python3' > - OpenSUSE has 2x as 'python' and 3.x as 'python3' > - Arch has 2.x as 'python2' and 3.x as 'python' (!). > > Regards, > Ales > > On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 4:11:57 PM UTC+2, Jonathan Lundell wrote: >> >> On 10 Sep 2012, at 11:32 PM, pbreit <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Well...for starters, web2py, fabric and pil are 2.7. So, yes, I think >> it is an absolutely, insanely user-hostile decision. The python ecosystem >> is not even close to ready to move to 3. And from what I can tell, 3 offers >> minimal benefits. >> >> OTOH, it's never going to be ready to move until it gets a push. A first >> step would be to be able to count on its presence. > > --
