On Thu, 2020-04-30 at 00:38 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 29. 04. 20 21:42, Lloyd Kvam wrote:
> > What you say is true. I still don't agree that "python3.9" as a
> > annoys humans.
> I am not a package pro, but simply reading along as an interested human user. To me,
> periods in package names can be confusing.
My sentence was about "python3.9" not being more annoying than
I wonder, why do you consider periods in names confusing?
It's mostly when I am trying to relate program names, package names, and package file
And I am also using Ubuntu which has its own Debian quirks and many dots. I'll
We have around ~100 source package names with dot. Most of them have versions, e.g.:
I know. I am not sure that's an argument for more dots. We're only one hundred or
so names from
being dot-free would be an alternate take.
Some use dot as a separator, e.g.:
Why openoffice.org-diafilter rather than openoffice-diafilter?
Most days I can blissfully type dnf upgrade and I'm fairly oblivious to all the effort
goes into making this work. Watching a list like this lets me see the hard work that goes
making my life much easier.
> I will adjust to whatever you decide to do, and I am not
informed enough to want a vote in
> this decision comes down, but I do not see an advantage to this sort of change.
The biggest advantage I see is getting closer to upstream.
Which is more important than my aversion to dots. I'll say again that I will adjust
necessary. Make the decision that will work for you.
And thanks for all your efforts packaging up so much great software.
The command that the user executes is "python3.9", not
I know no other place in the Python ecosystem where Python 3.9 is called
"python39" than the names of RPM packages (or other Linux distro packages).
I've googled "python36", "python37" etc. and all I could find was
Fedora/RHEL/CentOS related (or AUR). We have invented that naming ourselves and
we don't like being different :)
(There is the "py39" short identifier used e.g. in tox, but not