| 1 |
On Tuesday 21 July 2015 18:59:00 Ben de Groot wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 20 July 2015 at 17:27, Jason Zaman <perfinion@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:39:25AM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> >> > I would like to hear from the other team members, yes. |
| 6 |
> >> |
| 7 |
> >> I have sympathy towards those who are asking for only one Python in |
| 8 |
> >> stages (as in, I would be fine with that), but I very much think we |
| 9 |
> >> should not leave Python 3 out of generally installed systems by |
| 10 |
> >> default. We need to move through the transition, and increasing the |
| 11 |
> >> barriers to Python 3 adoption will only make that process slower. |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> >> I also feel like a voting process for this is probably not a solution. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > I also very much dislike shipping only python2. Having only one python |
| 16 |
> > is admirable and I'm all for it but if we only ship one by default it |
| 17 |
> > should be python3. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> That is a nice sentiment, but unpractical. We have a lot more packages |
| 20 |
> that require python2, while we only have 74 that require python3. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> While it may be possible to ship with python3 only (I haven't looked |
| 23 |
> at what the packages in stage3 support), users will almost certainly |
| 24 |
> need to install python2 when they start installing more packages. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> But if we ship with python2 only, then most users won't need python3. |
| 27 |
> Those who want it, can of course simply add it. Going with python2 as |
| 28 |
> default simply makes more sense. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Hmm on desktop machine with kde and etc. i have only one package with deps on |
| 31 |
python3 - onboard (because no packages with same functional). :) |
Archives