On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Nicolas Chauvat <[email protected] > wrote:
> Hi, > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:00:36PM +0200, Arve Knudsen wrote: > > I should hope so, but I don't know. Maybe your practices just don't mesh > > with the "standard" way of doing things? I guess one should find out if > the > > "develop" command can be customized to meet your pattern. > > I am afraid you got this backwards. PYTHONPATH has been the standard > for almost 20 years. I do not have sympathy for easy_install and its > mess that no one can seem to get to work right. > I don't think I got it backwards at all, that I can see. Having your package in your project (instead of generating it in the installation) doesn't prevent PYTHONPATH in any way, it just means you need another level (i.e., the project) in PYTHONPATH. We will try to help make things work for you and apply the patches > that the community will send, but will not drop a simple way to work > with PYTHONPATH because of the new 'develop' command provided by a > tool that is not even maintained by its author. AFAIK the work is being continued by the "distribute" project. I'm under the impression at least that the setuptools/distribute way of distributing Python software is emerging as the standard. I should definitely like to be able to use "pip" to install e.g. pylint, especially given the complex dependency set, even if I install some parts of the chain from Mercurial. Arve
_______________________________________________ Python-Projects mailing list [email protected] http://lists.logilab.org/mailman/listinfo/python-projects
