In message <2cb0c88b-58ea-4704-8578-2ebd766f1...@t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>, Peo wrote:
> My current plan is to call the library something like 'foo1' and > import it into scripts like 'import foo1 as foo'. Releases that change the > API would be installed as 'foo2', 'foo3' and so on. This works fine but it > will be quite difficult to create new releases (documentation and library > code are littered with references to 'foo1'). I don’t understand why this is a problem. The references to “foo1” are because it is “foo1” that implements those facilities, is it not? When “foo2” comes along, you will introduce that name where specifying the facilities specific to it, will you not? Where both modules provide the same facilities, you will have to mention both names, and only in those cases. I don’t see how you can possibly short-cut this process and still produce correct documentation. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list