1 |
On Jul 30, 2012 9:40 AM, "Nikolaj Sjujskij" <sterkrig@×××××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> Seems to me that the easiest way to manage this would be to set |
5 |
>> USE="python2" for portage in the profile, IFF you want to prevent |
6 |
>> python:3 in the stages. |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> That said, I don't see what the real issue is here. Those that want |
9 |
>> python:2 and/or python:3 will set USE_PYTHON correctly. I am concerned |
10 |
>> here that a vocal minority will cause some invasive change that the |
11 |
>> silent majority cares little about. Some may find the current status |
12 |
>> annoying, others will find the change annoying (me being one of the |
13 |
>> latter). |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> Unless someone can provide empirical data to backup any claim, one way |
16 |
>> or the other, I would strongly suggest that no change be made, |
17 |
>> especially without further consultation regarding the _proposed_ |
18 |
>> change with the developer and user communities. |
19 |
>> |
20 |
>> Thank you for your consideration. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> I as a user could only +1. I can't see the issue, honestly. Those who |
23 |
> don't like Python 3, could jolly well mask it and tweak USE_PYTHON / |
24 |
> PYTHON_TARGETS vars. Using this ugly debianish `python3-3.2` or whatever |
25 |
|
26 |
Another thing. PYTHON_TARGETS is set in the gentoo profile as 2.7 3 |
27 |
2 as default. If this is true, can we take 3.2 out and make it a user |
28 |
opt-in? |
29 |
|
30 |
I don't think 3.2 is necessary in a lot of systems/use cases. |
31 |
|
32 |
> is a step back in my opinion. Quite a lot of users could kepp their |
33 |
> systems Python2-less. About half of Python modules (at least) work with |
34 |
> both Python 2 and 3. Heck, even Qt3 and Qt4 were one slotted package! |
35 |
> |