On Tue, 2017-02-28 at 14:23 +0100, jan matejek wrote:
On 28.2.2017 12:31, Thomas Bechtold wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2017-02-17 at 18:31 +0100, jan matejek wrote:
7. If you are using update-alternatives, remove them. Instead mark the executable as %python3_only: %python3_only %{_bindir}/yourbinary In most cases, we only need one version of the executable. If the purpose of the tool is, e.g., reading EXIF metadata, we don't care if python 2 or 3 reads them. (And the library files are still installed for both.)
Why? What if I only want the py2 version (including only the py2 dependencies)? Having the "binary" only shipped in the py3 package means that I need all python3 packages installed.
Why would you want "only the py2 version?"
There is a product called SUSE OpenStack Cloud and that uses only python2 . And we don't want to add (and maintain) all the python3 versions for a huge dependency list just because some binaries need the py3 version.
if it's a tool for which python is an implementation detail, you *should not care* which version of python it is using.
The point of this is gradually moving towards python3-as-default. This should mean that after enough packages are converted, the typical installation will only have a Python 3 stack, not a Python 2 one.
In the meantime, you will need both, which is impractical, but it seems better than doing a big switch-flip and mass-changing every "python- *" to "python3-*". Also IIRC this (having both stacks) is already the case because of some stacks (KDE, also GNOME i think?) moving to python 3.
OTOH, If it actually matters which python version you're using, then of course you keep both and optionally provide update-alternatives. That's what the addendum to this point says.
The question is what we want to recommend. I stumbled over this while I started to create a py2pack spec template for the single spec approach. Cheers, Tom -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org