I realize, I’m really, really late to this conversation, but if anyone is listening, I wonder if there would be some consideration given to allowing the user to choose how they want the python 2 binary named? I’m updating several servers and finding brew package after package broken because it doesn’t know about the python2 name. Now, sure I can report everyone broken package, but when I’m upgrading servers, I don’t want nor have time to file a tedious report on every affected package. I could be spared this trauma if the python rule allowed me to install python under the original name.
I don’t know the reason for renaming the python binary (it seems to me that paths should be juggled if shadowing the system python were an issue, just as must be done for every other brew installed binary) but it sure seems like a large portion of the brew ecosystem still hasn’t adapted to the new binary name, so it’d be kind to users to offer them the option to use the “python” name if they wish.