From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nv8km-0007Ez-VL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:35:09 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0BA71E090B; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:35:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12DB7E08DA for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:35:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.22.2] (ip68-4-152-120.oc.oc.cox.net [68.4.152.120]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D2F21B400E for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4BACAA07.90409@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 05:35:19 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100315 Thunderbird/3.0.3 ThunderBrowse/3.2.6.8 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item References: <201003041923.17749.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <201003241744.31105.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <20100324095735.1bba94a2@angelstorm> <201003241814.45606.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <20100324103237.0b534fd0@angelstorm> <20100324180334.GA23065@linux1> <4BAA6EA0.6080801@gentoo.org> <20100324202529.GA23374@linux1> <20100324211255.GA23676@linux1> <20100324204750.1f34e073@angelstorm> In-Reply-To: <20100324204750.1f34e073@angelstorm> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: c0586fc4-f8a0-45b2-8d67-e0fe4392d1c8 X-Archives-Hash: 0975056c86420ebb3e7dce4fdf7e3607 On 03/24/2010 08:47 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:12:55 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:36:52PM +0100, Ben de Groot wrote: >>> We agree that this is the minimum that should be done. But our >>> Python lead stubbornly refuses to honor this reasonable request. >> >> On the other hand, I can see his point as well. The news item makes it >> very clear that python-3 cannot be the default python and that python-2 >> needs to be installed. > > Again, if it *cannot* be the default python, then it *should not* be installed by default, which is what will happen if it's marked stable and users aren't told to p.mask it. Even then, it'll likely get installed first, as users will probably learn about p.masking it only *after* they install it. Do we have a precedent on this, if for example, we look at the last time that a new slot of java (like 1.5) came out that wasn't supported by all packages and therefore couldn't be set as the default system jvm? -- Thanks, Zac