Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python
Subject: Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 02:10:01 +0200
Message-ID: <vSpvP-4Mx-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <vQwi5-11b-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <vREnf-1jE-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <vSl8S-29p-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <debian@kitterman.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 57
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:10577



On May 22, 2018 7:24:12 PM UTC, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian=2Eorg> wrote:
>On 05/20/2018 11:49 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 05/17/2018 08:53 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3]=2E
>>>
>>> The most important change from my point of view is
>>>
>>> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow
>the
>>> -  ``python2``/``python3`` convention, even in code that is not
>intended to
>>> +* It is strongly encouraged that distribution-specific packages use
>``python2``
>>> +  or ``python3`` rather than ``python``, even in code that is not
>intended to
>>>    operate on other distributions=2E
>>>
>>> I don't think there is enough time to replace all python shebangs to
>python2 in
>>> time for the buster release, however there is no harm in starting
>this process
>>> now=2E  But I'd like to get this done for buster+1, in the case we
>still need to
>>> ship a Python2/2=2E7, so that buster+1 doesn't ship with a python
>command, but
>>> maybe with a python2 command=2E
>>=20
>> I very much support this proposal, and don't understand why Scott and
>> Piotr aren't
>>
>> (plus seemingly inventing things you haven't proposed)=2E
>
>Let me rephrase these last bits between brackets, because it looks like
>some people understood this as accusations, which isn't the case=2E So,
>the (politically) correct wording would be:
>
>"I believe Scott and Pitor misunderstood the intial proposal, and
>extrapolated it to the point that they thought things that were not in
>the initial proposal were there=2E"

More nonsense=2E  There's nothing pc about avoidance of false accusations=
=2E  I guess you calling me incompetent to read English is a step up from s=
aying I am making stuff up to complain about it, but still it's not great=
=2E

What's wrong with just saying something like "I understood Matthias' propo=
sal differently=2E  I don't think he intended that=2E"?  There's no need to=
 accuse anyone of anything=2E

The point he thought most important (use /usr/bin/python2) was already don=
e=2E  A number of people have spoken up against the idea of adding new pyth=
on2 binary packages=2E  Maybe I'm wrong and that was never intended=2E  If =
so, then great, we're done=2E

Scott K