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

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 2013-08-19, o godz. 20:43:05
Marien Zwart <marienz@g.o> napisał(a):

> 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.

That sounds like a lot of effort with no real gain.

> 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.

Other distros didn't support having multiple PyPy versions before.
I mean, we can expect them to have just one PyPy + PyPy 3.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny