[Python-Dev] PEP 394 update proposal: Allow changing the python command in some cases (original) (raw)

Ben Finney ben+python at benfinney.id.au
Fri Apr 27 02:03:17 EDT 2018

Ben Finney <ben+python at benfinney.id.au> writes:

Petr Viktorin <encukou at gmail.com> writes:

> […] we feel that the only way to enforce that guidelines is to > provide environments where the python command does not work > (unless explicitly installed). Yes. The ‘python’ command is confusing, for the reasons you say. There should be ‘python2’ and ‘python3’ commands for Python 2 and Python 3 respectively, and no ‘python’ command should be installed by the operating system. The fact that ‘/usr/bin/python’ exists is an historical accident, and I agree with the proposal you state: the best way to correct the confusion is to bar the confusing command from being installed by packages.

Because the above is ambiguous, I'll clarify: I am not calling for, and PEP 394 does not call for, the banishment of the ‘python’ command.

What I'm saying is that muddying the rules further on what ‘python’ may or may not mean is worse than banishing the ‘python’ command entirely.

So, short of banishing ‘python’ entirely, I think PEP 394 is already a good clear way to address the issue. Existing, documented and supported means to locally modify a ‘python’ command already exist and should be sufficient.

I trust that PEP 394 will not be weakened in its effect, and I wish you well with using the already-supported, already-documented, PEP-394 compatible means to add local customisations for a ‘python’ command.

-- \ “Try to learn something about everything and everything about | `\ something.” —Thomas Henry Huxley | o_) | Ben Finney

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list