On Jan 29, 2014, at 8:59 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 January 2014 23:48, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: >> >> So what did you mean when you said "We discussed it extensively before >> PEP 427 was approved" if you're now saying that it wasn't discussed. > > "Explicitly" would be a better word: > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2012-September/018960.html > > Like I said, that particular aspect wasn't controversial, so while it > was noted a few times (a few other examples of which you found), it > was the overall discussions that were extensive. Both Daniel and I > knew the zipimport compatibility for packages that were themselves zip > compatible was a deliberate feature, so it was a surprise to me when > Armin Ronacher said in his recent article that it wasn't supported > (and hence the clarification). > > Cheers, > Nick. > > -- > Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia That also mentions the fact that he was considering allowing other compression algorithms which would make it incompatible with zip import. I don’t agree that this points to any promise that Wheels are themselves importable as I can guarantee I poured over that spec over and over making sure we weren’t adding something from Egg that had been problematic in the past. I have no plans to support adding Wheels to sys.path in a way that is supported for end users to do that, in any tool or project I work on. But whatever, I feel like you’ve placed yourself above the PEP process and are adding features by fiat instead of through the process. Obviously you feel different and this discussion has gone toxic. So carry on. ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
