Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:42:14 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> To: Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org> Cc: Joseph Mingrone <jrm@freebsd.org>, Ruslan Makhmatkhanov <rm@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 988da7290c99 - main - ./UPDATING: mention the python default version change Message-ID: <lri7xdt6hkxf2udachtafxqijaa7lp2kbshhv7mi7ityqkc3mj@h63p5raqu4yr> In-Reply-To: <8d5be29c-94a7-4edd-bc61-c50e8b0ff754@freebsd.org> References: <202405291420.44TEKdBd073352@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <pupckib4hcq2tiqesuyxfodzz7q6rcjnzn6625qhsazzehaotd@gxm54qjiyxuq> <86frtu6rxz.fsf@phe.ftfl.ca> <xu6munpe2xqir4iwk7k4suprjvxym7dob5ebqz5yodphbaxe56@cf63vkgioyqe> <8d5be29c-94a7-4edd-bc61-c50e8b0ff754@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon 03 Jun 11:25, Charlie Li wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Mon 03 Jun 10:07, Joseph Mingrone wrote: > > > We gave similar advice when the emacs ports had version information in > > > the package name (other than PKGVERSION at the end). > > > > And I find the advice on emacs problematic as well and make things complicated > > for users. > > > > In the case of python, final packages should not wear a pyXXX prefix, so during > > upgrades for users pkg upgrade will just propose to install the new set of > > dependencies which will conflicts with the old one and as such propose to remove > > them. (this is not done in the python world, at least not always and causes tons > > of problems). > > > The way we do Python packaging is partially emblematic of how not every > (current supported upstream) Python package in the wild is compatible with > every supported Python interpreter/distribution. But there are valid use > cases for having multiple Python distributions in the same environment, with > their own package sets (so long as said packages are USE_PYTHON=concurrent > safe). > > lwhsu@, jrm@ and myself briefly discussed at BSDCan having something like > the lang/python3 and lang/python meta-ports for individual Python packages, > but implementing it in a way that doesn't make maintainers' lives hell > especially without subpackages is a problem. I am not saying that allowing concurrent version is a bad idea, but in that area php packaging does a better job, I have no idea what is supposed to make sense in the end, but the current situation is clearly unfriendly to any package manager. There is a reason why on most linux distros they do support only one major version of python for packaging and encourage users to use virtual env or alike for other versions, I am not saying we should do that, but we need to find something that is upgrade friendly and do not rely on hacks like pkg set. Best regards, Bapt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?lri7xdt6hkxf2udachtafxqijaa7lp2kbshhv7mi7ityqkc3mj>