On 10/31/2016 11:28 AM, jan matejek wrote:
hello,
On 27.10.2016 20:35, Todd Rme wrote:
2. Along those lines, I think pypy2 and pyp3 versions should be available, especially with a lot of progress now happening in pypy3 thanks to mozilla funding it.
I would very much prefer to NOT support pypy 2 at all, now that pypy3 is making significant progress. Given that we don't really support pypy2 at this point, I don't see any benefits in starting. That's why my proposal uses unversioned "pypy". That is not going to be future-proof if we ever get pypy 4, but, well, I say we take that risk ;)
Whether or not we support pypy2 is probably not necessarily the issue here. It would just be nice to take the guess work and ambiguity out of the system and stick with versioned names, whether there will be a Python 4 at some distant future or not is really immaterial. You can look at it this way, currently we have stuff with "python" and "python3" and we all know python really means python2. But at some point in the future python3 will become the default, does that mean that python3 turns into python and what is now python turns into python2. If that is the case the confusion and ripples will be big and forever after it is inevitable that people will hit a point where they will have to figure out from scratch by looking at a wiki or other source of information when the transition occured and what the "best" course of action is. All of this can be avoided by simply adding the version number now when we go through a transition anyway and make anything that is not versioned go away. I doubt our fingers will wear off by having to type an extra character all the time ;) Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU Public Cloud Architect LINUX rjschwei@suse.com IRC: robjo