Ubuntu package "python3" does not include tkinter

[rusi]

On Apr 23, 5:22 am, Steven D'Aprano <steve
+comp.lang.pyt... at pearwood.info> wrote:
> We're also glossing over what it means to be a dependency. This is not
> obvious, and in fact I would argue that X is NOT a dependency for
> tkinter, even though tkinter will not "work" without it, for some
> definition of work. I can quite happily import tkinter on a remote
> machine over ssh:

Yes the crux of the matter is what it means 'to work' and therefore
'to not work'

Lets say my car is 'not working'
On further investigation its found that the petrol tank is empty.
A case could be made for either case: 'it (the car) working' or 'its
not working'

To the extent that pragmatically 'not working' is attended by a
mechanic, its not in that category
To the extent that (even more pragmatically) I missed an important
appointment, its in that category

Both of which gloss over the fact that after filling the petrol it may
still not work.
So to conclude: "since I could not check,  its vacuously working"
is more problematic than the contrary
"since I could not check, its vacuously not working"

Package systems need to 'federate' so to speak workingness from a
zillion packages to the whole system.
The problem is that workingness is peculiar to each package.
Therefore it seems reasonable to me to ask of a package system that
- it allows a maximum number of different configurations for different
requirements ('without crap')
- it disallows all kinds of misconfigured/non-working systems --
therefore conservative dependencies are good
- the above subject to reasonable best efforts -- so dont cater to
fringe pathological cases (like I want Tkinter but not X)

BTW I suggested earlier that python could have something like KDE (Kde-
full and a smaller Kde-standard).
Just checked that python already has python2.7 and python2.7-minimal
where the description of the latter says: "it can be used in the boot
process for basic tasks"