Mail archive

Re: [alpine-devel] Normalizing Python packages in aports

From: <>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 12:32:30 +0100

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 10:31:53AM +0100, Natanael Copa wrote:
> Earler, before python3 was supported, all the py-* packages was
> python2. We should probably also look over all py-* packages and make
> sure that all python2 packages are renamed to py2-*.

2c from a lurker.

A large part of this thread looks dedicated to surviving a mess created
by the reuse of the same name "python" (also "py-" as a prefix or similar)
for different and incompatible softwares.

The problems would hardly exist if python2 and python3 worlds
were separated from the beginning.

That's why I would like to emphasize the need to always use strictly
specified references for the purposes of packaging.

In other words:

Do not use "default" names which change their meaning with time and
then their usage must be traced and adjusted everywhere (!)

From this point of view, it is important to (also) name all python3
packages as py3-*.

This is not the same as handling the preferences of the _users_. They
can get a convenience link of "python" to something they like - but then
per-user, not in the common part of $PATH. This is not hard.

(It _is_ hard to prevent the misuse of "default" "python" if it is present
at hand, with its unpredictable semantics. No "python" should be there
in a common location like /usr/{,local/}bin unless a local administrator
adds a link there to some pythonN or whatnot and takes himself all the
consequences. "python2" and/or "python3" should be there today, possibly
"python3" and "python4" tomorrow, but not some "python"-of-the-day.)

Please do not perpetuate the others' badly chosen practices - they can
not be made consistent other than only temporary and only with a large
effort each time, if at all.


Received on Tue Mar 19 2019 - 12:32:30 UTC