On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:08:22AM +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Kevin Teague <ke...@bud.ca> wrote: > > If there was a installer, I'm assuming it'd be quite a simple one - e.g. > > installs single-version into site-packages. This caters to well to casual > > user -- they can just run a "standard" command out-of-the-box and take-off > > running with a distribution, but it also teaches them bad habits (e.g. that > > you want to be commonly installing into site-packages or that you want to > > develop your own code without properly expressing it's dependencies). When > > they want to use better development practices, they'll have to switch to a > > "non-standard" tools to do "non-standard" installations. > > For the "site-package" part, this is true, but so wrong. Many people > in this mailing list (and in real life) agrees that it's > wrong to install a package in site-packages.
Half of those people say that it's wrong to install into /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages (because /usr belongs to apt/rpm) but fine to install into /usr/local/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages. The other half say that it's always wrong to install globally, since you may want to use different sets of packages for different purposes. Marius Gedminas -- To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a computer.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
