Revisiting PEP 394

Posted Feb 28, 2019 1:20 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
In reply to: Revisiting PEP 394 by NYKevin
Parent article: Revisiting PEP 394

> Not if all the libraries jump ship. A ton have already pledged to do so in 2020: https://python3statement.org/
Don't care about them. There are many in-house applications that are written in Py2 and that are not migrating any time soon.

Revisiting PEP 394

Posted Feb 28, 2019 1:23 UTC (Thu) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link] (2 responses)

If your only concern is in-house applications, you do not need to care about PEP 394 at all and can just configure the /usr/bin/python symlink to point at whatever you like.

Revisiting PEP 394

Posted Feb 28, 2019 2:01 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (1 responses)

The problem is, a script that runs perfectly on RHEL7 won't run on RHEL8 or Ubuntu Server. Yeah, it can be fixed.

But why? There's no reason whatsoever for this change other than vanity. Just stick with python2 and python3 - easy and unambiguous.

Revisiting PEP 394

Posted Feb 28, 2019 2:52 UTC (Thu) by JdGordy (subscriber, #70103) [Link]

Isnt the whole point though all those legacy script which just use "#!/usr/bin/python". If you've already fixed your internal scripts to call the right one then you don't need to worry.