M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > Eggs are nice for plugins and application add-ons, but I don't > think they should be used for system wide installation of > Python extensions - these need to be under the control of > the system's installer which also deals with the Python > installation itself.
I don't see where you come to that conclusion. After a long and rather difficult discussion regarding Debian packages, while I don't think we all came away entirely happy, there seemed to be some reasonable peace made about eggs and packages. There's still some outstanding issues, but there's also a plan to resolve those issues. Honestly I'm still baffled by the hostility towards eggs, as though the fact that eggs duplicate some system package functionality means that they must be in conflict. They don't need to be. Eggs and setuptools goes to great length to be compatible with current Python functionality and conventions, while adding functionality using the current systems. It also goes to great length to be compatible with distutils. And it also has served useful as a backport of distutils, so for instance I can make use of the upload command (which I believe is only in distutils in 2.5). Phillip has put a lot of effort into making setuptools play nicely with current Python conventions. Anyway, getting back to something concrete, what specifically are the issues you see with Eggs as a general distribution format? -- Ian Bicking / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://blog.ianbicking.org _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
