On Apr 15, 2009, at 12:15 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
The much more common use case is that of wanting to have a base
package
installation which optional add-ons that live in the same logical
package namespace.
The PEP provides a way to solve this use case by giving both
developers
and users a standard at hand which they can follow without having to
rely on some non-standard helpers and across Python implementations.
I'm not sure I understand what advantage your proposal gives over the
current mechanism for doing this.
That is, add to your __init__.py file:
from pkgutil import extend_path
__path__ = extend_path(__path__, __name__)
Can you describe the intended advantages over the status-quo a bit
more clearly?
James
_______________________________________________
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
