[gentoo-python] Re: Naming of PyPy and PyPy3 executables

[Marien Zwart]

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> This raises the question: how should we name our PyPy executables?
> While I really like the 'pypyX.Y' idea, I don't really want to see
> 'pypy32.1' :). We could go for 'pypy-X.Y' and 'pypy3-X.Y' but that would
> be inconsistent with CPython (pythonX.Y) and Jython (jythonX.Y0).
> A somehow ugly alternative would be to use 'pypy-cX.Y' and 'pypy3-cX.Y'
> but that is quite a custom invention.

I believe Jython follows CPython's versioning. If PyPy supports python
2 and 3 using differently-named binaries from the same PyPy version
(which doesn't follow any particular CPython version) we'll either
have to deviate from PyPy's version number in how we name our
binaries, or be inconsistent with CPython/Jython in how we name them.

I think your pypy-x.y / pypy3-x.y suggestion could work.

An alternative would be to include the version of the bundled CPython
stdlib into the name. Unfortunately (for the naming scheme) I think
we'd still want to support simultaneous installation of different PyPy
versions with the same bundled stdlib version, so we'd then have to
stick both into the installed binary's version number (pypy2.7-2.1,
pypy3.2-2.1). We could then add some symlinks, so we'd have pypy3.2
and pypy3 counterparts to python3.2 and python3. Having those would
appeal to me, but (if we want to support multiple PyPy versions per
CPython stdlib version) that's a lot of extra wrappers floating
around.

So I think your simpler approach (pypy-2.1, pypy3-2.1) would be best
for now. We'll have to keep an eye out for what other distros and
upstream do.
-- 

Marien Zwart (marienz on freenode)