I don't really understand what all this has to do with per user site-packages.
Note that the motivation for having per user site-packages was to: * address a common request by Python extension package users, * get rid off the hackery done by setuptools in order to provide this. As such the PEP can also be seen as an effort to enable code cleanup *before* adding e.g. pkg_resources to the stdlib. Cheers, -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, Jan 22 2008) >>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ... http://zope.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ :::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,MacOSX for free ! :::: eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH Pastor-Loeh-Str.48 D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611 On 2008-01-21 16:06, Nick Coghlan wrote: > Steve Holden wrote: >> Christian Heimes wrote: >>> Steve Holden wrote: >>>> Maybe once we get easy_install as a part of the core (so there's no need >>>> to find and run ez_setup.py to start with) things will start to improve. >>>> This is an issue the whole developer community needs to take seriously >>>> if we are interested in increasing take-up. >>> setuptools and easy_install won't be included in Python 2.6 and 3.0: >>> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0365/ >>> >> Yes, and yet another release (two releases) will go out without easy >> access to the functionality in Pypi. PEP 365 is a good start, but Pypi >> loses much of its point until new Python users get access to it "out of >> the box". I also appreciate that resource limitations are standing in >> the way of setuptools' inclusion (is there something I can do about >> that?) Just to hammer the point home, however ... > > Have another look at the rationale given in PEP 365 - it isn't the > resourcing to do the work that's a problem, but the relatively slow > release cycle of the core. > > By including pkg_resources in the core (with the addition of access to > pure Python modules and packages on PyPI), we would get a simple, stable > base for Python packaging to work from, and put users a single standard > command away from the more advanced (but also more volatile) features of > easy_install and friends. > > Cheers, > Nick. > _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com