Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python
Subject: Re: Python Policy: Things to consider for Stretch
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 07:10:01 +0100
Message-ID: <qUm25-DV-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <qTpEL-7eF-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <qUjdU-6VH-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qUlz3-bV-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <debian@kitterman.com>
User-Agent: KMail/4.13.3 (Linux/3.13.0-71-generic; KDE/4.13.3; x86_64; ; )
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 67
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:8148

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 04:33:55 PM Ben Finney wrote:
> Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> writes:
> > I don't particularly agree, but if that's correct, then there's a
> > large amount of change needed throughout the policy. These certainl=
y
> > aren't the only places this comes up.
>=20
> Yes, that's likely because when the Debian Python policy was initiall=
y
> drafted, there was no Python 3 anywhere close to entering Debian. So
> =E2=80=9CPython=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CPython 2=E2=80=9D were less amb=
iguously conflated at that time.
>=20
> Now that Python 2 and Python 3 are both commonly (and correctly)
> referred to as =E2=80=9CPython=E2=80=9D, we need to take more care us=
ing the terms for
> what we mean.
>=20
> > Ambiguous or not, I think the policy is mostly consistent in using
> > python and python3 vice python2 and python3.
>=20
> Well that's another dimension of confusion :-) The term =E2=80=9Cpyth=
on2=E2=80=9D and
> =E2=80=9Cpython3=E2=80=9D are named of commands, more than the names =
of languages.
>=20
> I think you're right that this needs a general clean-up through the
> policy document, to consistently use:
>=20
> * =E2=80=9Cpython2=E2=80=9D to refer to that command only;
>=20
> * =E2=80=9Cpython3=E2=80=9D to refer to that command only;
>=20
> * =E2=80=9Cpython=E2=80=9D to refer to that command (and I'd suggest =
deprecating it
>   where feasible);
>=20
> * =E2=80=9CPython 2=E2=80=9D referring exclusively to that language v=
ersion 2.x and no
>   other versions of that language;
>=20
> * =E2=80=9CPython 3=E2=80=9D referring exclusively to that language v=
ersion 3.x and no
>   other versions of that language;
>=20
> * =E2=80=9CPython=E2=80=9D referring to the language implemented eith=
er as Python 2 or
>   Python 3.
>=20
> > At this point I think internal consistency is probably more importa=
nt,
> > so if someone wants to go through and make all the python's that
> > should be python2, etc then please send in a patch.
>=20
> I'll take that on. Send it to anywhere in particular? Or I can just s=
end
> it to this forum.

Here or a bzr branch (per my other reply) somewhere is fine.  I agree w=
ith all=20
of that except the idea of deprecating /usr/bin/python.  It'll never po=
int to=20
anything other than a Python (2) version in Debian, so there's no need =
to=20
deprecate it faster than Python (2) in general.

Scott K