Re: [HEADS UP] Removing python24 and python25

[Jörn Clausen <joernc%googlemail.com@localhost>]

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost> wrote:
>  package with no suffix is the latest stable, and suffixes are old
>  versions
>
> seems reasonable as well.  And after adding that, we have arrived, more
> or less, at the current state, so I'm not sure what you want to change.

That's not true for python, there is no package without a version
number. Which is, in a way, the problem one of my users had, when I
switch from Python 2.5 to 2.6 a few weeks ago. As all packages are
versioned, the name of the interpreter changed from python25 to
python26. I don't know if his software has problems per se to change
from 2.5 to 2.6, but at least the changed name of the interpreter
broke his application. Having a consistent name for a binary would be
IMHO a nice side effect of having a default package without a version
number. The Java packages are another example, where the name of the
"interpreter" changes with every package. Some mechanism to say "this
is the (or even better: 'my') default package, and it provides
/usr/pkg/bin/python, /usr/pkg/bin/java, etc." would provide another
aspect of stability. At least as long as the application is compatible
with the different versions of Python/Java/etc, of course.

Joern

-- 
Joern Clausen
http://thebloeg.blogspot.com/
http://www.oe-files.de/oefiles/