[CJefferson]

I have no problem with Arch having a "only install python3 by default" rule. They can even not distribute python2 for all I care.

But, don't make /usr/bin/python run python3, that just confuses programs which have made the (reasonable based on past experience, and official python advice) assumption that it /usr/bin/python will run python2.

[simplyluke]

So forever into the future $ python should run python2? That's not pragmatic at all.

[marvy]

On Ubuntu, "sqlite" starts sqlite2.x; if you want sqlite3.x, you must type "sqlite3". The last version of sqlite2 came out in 2005. As far as I know, hardly anyone still uses sqlite2 for anything anymore. (I could be very wrong though.) Nevertheless, people must still type that extra character "3". The sky has not yet fallen :)

It seems to me that the same approach could work for Python.

[michaelmrose]

Why not? Can you elaborate?

[greggyb]

Pythons 4, 5, 6..., N will feasibly exist in the future. Why should Python 2 forever retain the executable name 'python'?

[michaelmrose]

Eventually logically python 2 will be little used enough to be dropped and there may not be a python4 any time in the foreseeable future so perhaps you are just borrowing trouble.

[marvy]

If Py4 is compatible with Py3, why bump the version number? If not, you better be careful which one you get!