On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Roberto De Ioris <robe...@unbit.it> wrote:
> > 2011/7/8 Bjarni Rúnar Einarsson <b...@pagekite.net> > > > > Nice script; but i (and also i guess Cal) were thinking more in the terms > > of having a single binary. > > > > [DISCLAIMER] i still have not tried pybreeder > > Having a single blob file (the .py file generated by pybreeder) will allow > us to "link" it to the uwsgi binary generating another binary with python > code embedded. This is pretty easy to accomplish. I will try it in the > next few days. > Cool! Let me know if you have any problems, I'm very open to input and suggestions at this stage. I do wonder whether in practice it is really necessary to bundle everything into one file. If the goal is to simplify deployment, than Breeder lets you simplifiy installation to: * apt-get install <standard dependencies> * cp big-snake.py /usr/local/bin/app.py Where big-snake.py is all your custom code, combined by Breeder. This of course assumes that all the custom code is pure Python and all the dependencies are available from apt (or some other standard repo) - but I think that may actually be the common case. Maybe this is "good enough"? It also has the advantage (or disadvantage, depending on your needs) that anything maintained by the operating system packager will still receive security updates, you won't have to rebuild your binary and redeploy everytime someone fixes a bug. Just a thought. -- Bjarni R. Einarsson Founder, lead developer of PageKite. Make localhost servers visible to the world: http://pagekite.net/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
