Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conflicting documentation Python2 versus Python3 #774

stroobandt opened this issue Dec 26, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by kivy/kivy#6130

Conflicting documentation Python2 versus Python3 #774

stroobandt opened this issue Dec 26, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by kivy/kivy#6130


Copy link

@stroobandt stroobandt commented Dec 26, 2018

To a complete buildozer noob like myself, it is absolutely not clear if one should build against python2 or python3.

Firstly, over at one is led to think that python2 should be the default stable target. Furthermore, the installation instructions for buildozer seem to be severly outdated:

Python 3 support on Android is now available experimentally.

You can get buildozer at

git clone
cd buildozer
sudo python2.7 install

Over here at, the python2 versus python3 confusion persists:

For Android: please have a look at Android-SDK-NDK-Information. Please note that the default SDK/NDK coded in Buildozer works for target Python 2. For target Python 3, use appropriate SDK/NDK as per the documentation, and ensure you have python3 in your requirements.


Installing Buildozer with target Python 3 (default):

So in the end, what is the target for buildozer stable: python2 or python3?

This is all extremely confusing.
I am convinced many bug reports stem from the conflicting installation instructions and the resulting lingering files of differing buildozer versions (stable versus dev).


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@stroobandt stroobandt commented Dec 27, 2018

This reddit post happened to be way more informative than the official documentation.

This could serve as an example about how to improve the official buildozer documentation.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@inclement inclement commented Feb 3, 2019

Thanks for the report, I've opened a couple of PRs to resolve the confusion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.