Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)
On 18.05.2018 19:02, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> who said, that we should rename packages? The only packages being dropped are
>> the python defaults packages.
>>>
>>> I refuse to do that work!
>>
>> There is no work in renaming the packages. It's about the dependency generation
>> and the shebang.
>
> the work in dh-python is not trivial. The work needed in thousands of
> packages (all Python related packages build depend on python{,-dev} or
> python-all{,-dev} is not as well. Rebuilding all binary packages means
> even more work (${python:Depends} is not always the only dependency)…
> and that's only a work in Debian. There are lots of packages outside
> Debian that will need to be updated… for what purpose exactly?
buster+1 is not supposed to ship with "thousands" of Python2 packages, so you
are exaggerating this a lot. For what reason?
> To make it easier to propose later python2-foo binary package rename,
> like Fedora did?
What are you doing here? Accusing me of wrong-doing and lying? I explicitly
said that no other packages should be renamed.
>>> The only message it sends is that we don't think /usr/bin/python or
>>> python package is Python 2.7 anymore and that's definitely not the
>>> message I want to send.
>>
>> No, that's not what the PEP says.
>
> not yet. We all know that it will happen sooner or later, though.
Again, you are accusing upstream about not being honest about their intentions.
Please could you give any rationale for doing so?
https://github.com/python/peps/pull/630 makes it quiet explicit that this is not
the case.
A bit disappointed about this style of communication, Matthias
Reply to: