On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Ronald Oussoren <ronaldousso...@mac.com> wrote: > > On 3 Jun, 2010, at 9:50, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Ronald Oussoren <ronaldousso...@mac.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 31 May, 2010, at 19:10, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 19:02, Carl Meyer <c...@oddbird.net> wrote: >>>>>> Nope, pip's used --record on installation for years, and the above has >>>>>> been true since the moment uninstall landed in pip. There are enough >>>>>> different ways things can get installed that it's not surprising that >>>>>> some discussions may have been confused ;-) >>>>> >>>>> That may be it. Forcing --record in Python 3.2 would be a step forward >>>>> then? :-) >>>> >>>> You mean in the current distutils ? Because distutils2 will have the >>>> PEP 376 implementation, >>>> where we create a RECORD file for each installed project in its dist-info/ >>> >>> I haven't carefully read the entire discussion, but do you mean that >>> distutils won't follow PEP 376 during installation? >> >> If people use the old Distutils, (what I've called the current >> distutils), and trigger an installation via 'python setup.py install'. >> It'll use the existing code, so install it the 'old' way. > > I know that distutils in python 2. 6 and 3.1 won't support PEP 376, but why > won't distutils conform to PEP 376 in python 2.7 and 3.2? > The RECORD file from PEP 376 would allow manually installed package (e.g. > "python setup.py install") to be further managed by a PEP 376 compliant > install tool. This should be pretty easy to add if it isn't in already, > although 2.7rc1 is awfully close.
Are you thinking about a full implicit switch to PEP 376, or an optional behavior ? -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig