[aur-general] Python 3
21 Jan
2011
21 Jan
'11
12:42 p.m.
Andrea Scarpino wrote:
I'm replying because this is tangential... why don't we specify "python3" instead of "python" as a dep to make packages future-proof? Even if Python 4 doesn't come out for a decade or more, it just seems that it would be logically consistent.
21 Jan
21 Jan
1:37 p.m.
New subject: [aur-general] Python 3
2011/1/21 Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca>:
Hi, this idea came up last year. Refer to http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-July/009504.html Unfortunately this thread has not been continued. Since this is a problem for any major release of central dependencies we should think of a naming policy to avoid transition problems. Cheers, Matthias
5114
Age (days ago)
5114
Last active (days ago)
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Matthias Männich
-
Xyne