At 07:41 PM 5/1/2009 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> It's unclear, however, who is using base packages besides mx.* and
>> ll.*, although I'd guess from the PyPI listings that perhaps Django
>> is. (It seems that "base" packages are more likely to use a
>> 'base-extension' naming pattern, vs. the 'namespace.project' pattern
>> used by "pure" packages.)
>
> I'll stress it again in case you missed it the first time: I think the
> main reason people use "pure namespace" versus "base namespace" packages
> is because hardly anyone know how to do the latter, not because there is
> no desire to do so!
>
> I, for one, have been trying to figure out how to do "base namespace"
> packages for years...
You mean, without PEP 382?
That won't be possible, unless you can coordinate all addon packages.
Base packages are a feature solely of PEP 382.
Actually, if you are using only the distutils, you can do this by
listing only modules in the addon projects; this is how the ll.*
tools are doing it. That only works if the packages are all being
installed in the same directory, though, not as eggs.
_______________________________________________
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
