On 17/03/2015 03:32, Michael Torrie wrote:
On 03/16/2015 09:09 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
OTOH many large-scale systems have sprouted their own packaging-systems
And indeed PIP and CPAN are both forms of package managers to fit the
special needs of those languages' developers. Sometimes that works well
with the OS package manager, sometimes it's at odds.
eg the full texlive system is some 2GB download! and has its own tlmgr
It would be good for things like apt to make a public-API and thereafter
For things like tlmgr, firefox-plugins, and of course
python-pip
ruby-gems
haskell-cabal
to try to be at least quasi-auto interoperable with apt
A meta package manager could, in theory, interact with all these systems
in a unified way. That's certainly one approach.
Wouldn't that be heading into a meta minefield? Isn't the problem that
package managers are trying to solve that of configuration management?
How many installations have to change world wide because of one serious
bug in (say) OpenSSL?
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
Mark Lawrence
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
