On 20 July 2015 at 09:00, Julien Cristau <julien.cris...@logilab.fr> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 09:56:55 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > >> [Julien Cristau, 2015-07-20] >> > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 21:28:32 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: >> > >> > > Should we patch distutils/setuptools to not generate them? It generates >> > > them even for Python 3.X (which has PEP420 implemented) >> > >> > Please don't. Using an pkg_resources-style vs PEP420 namespace should >> > be an upstream decision made individually for each namespace. >> >> dh_py* tools then > > No, since that would break sharing a namespace with parts installed > as a debian package and parts using the normal python tools.
And why should debian-python support that? If one wants to mix things, one is better of using virtualenv. I can see the point of re-using system things for compiled extensions and the interpreter itself, but not for the namespace jungles. -- Regards, Dimitri. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CANBHLUh_=lwj_dgwfaulrxyt_nrfx3se8jedmx_e6ez_0qa...@mail.gmail.com
