On 2010-04-26, Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
> I don't believe this to be the case, so I dropped Fred a mail.
>
> Here's his response:
>
> Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> > Hi Chris, thanks for the heads up.
> >
> > Not sure what's going on here; PIL is traditionally installed in
> > site-packages/PIL so that everything is available as "from PIL import
> > ...", but with a pth file that adds that directory to the path so that
> > pre-package code still works (there are tons of such code out there).
> >
> > It looks like the setup.py file achieves this as follows:
> >
> > extra_path = "PIL",
> > package_dir={"": "PIL"},
> > packages=[""],
> >
> > where extra_path creates the pth file, and the package_dir stuff makes
> > sure distutils installs things under PIL and not PIL/PIL. Some quick
> > Googling indicates that setuptools' support for extra_path is spotty
> > (non-existent until 2006, limited since then), so maybe this is the
> > issue?
> >
> > Could you persuade whoever's ranting about this to jump over to
> > image-sig and propose a patch that fixes whatever problem Plone is
> > having but preserves the old behaviour?
>
> Is such a patch possible? If so, could someone do as Fred asks and do so
> while resisting the temptation to be rude and further alienate the
> maintainer of what is a fantastic package? (yeah, I know, rich coming
> from me...)
Wow! Thanks Chris. That sounds like something we can work with. Not to speak
for Hanno, but maybe Hanno could provide such a patch ;-)
>
> cheers,
>
> Chris
>
--
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net
Author of Plone 3.3 Site Administration · http://aclark.net/plone-site-admin
_______________________________________________
Repoze-dev mailing list
Repoze-dev@lists.repoze.org
http://lists.repoze.org/listinfo/repoze-dev
