On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Ronald Oussoren <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 22 Oct, 2012, at 20:03, anatoly techtonik <[email protected]> wrote: > >> What do you think about this? >> >> http://bugs.python.org/issue16299 > > The cost of changing the build directory is high, and has limited upsides at > best. Some of the costs: confusing current users, breaking existing > documentation like books, breaking build systems, incompatibility between > python versions.
There is already a lot of incompatibilities between 2 and 3, and even between 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3, so the added value of this change to the total cost is miserable. Speaking about user confusion - if they won't find 'build' directory - they'll surely notice __build__ in their tree. Python 3 toolchains are still fragile, so it won't come for me a a surprise if Python 3.4 conventions are not the same as in 3.3. So, there are two questions: 1. If you were designing Python from scratch right now now - which name would you choose `__build__` or `build` for the temporary directory? 2. Is the Python 3.x already mature enough to deny any improvements (considering these are improvements) for the 3.4 version? > If the name of the build directory bothers you you can change it by adding > two lines to ~/.pydistutils.cfg: > > [build] > build-base = __build__ _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
