[Python-Dev] PEP 394 update proposal: Allow changing the `python` command in some cases

[Ben Finney]

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