> > I disagree with this completely. There's a tendency to think of everything > python as a package -- this is NOT a package. It has no __init__.py, it has > no __all__, it has no submodules, and it doesn't need any of that. It > simply does a one-off task -- it's bits of code to be used in a script. > Putting this sort of code in site-packages is what makes site-packages the > nightmare of ignored dependencies and overlapping versions it is today. > > If you want to make it into a package, you're welcome to do so. With that > includes registration with the cheeseshop to make sure the namespace is > unique, placing the single file within a folder that includes an __init__ > (and then likely just gets imported within that __init__), writing a > setup.py, etc etc. It's just complete overkill.
Then why put it in bin/python at all? Just drop the .py extension and put it in bin (with a 'correct' [whatever that may be] python hashbang)? Sean -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20110725/eda87cff/attachment.html>
