At 12:54 PM 11/25/2005 +1100, David Arnold wrote:
So, if a system package, shipped by the upstream developer as an egg, is
"unpacked" into a directory structure, and its metadata is maintained
in a .egg-info file somewhere in sys.path, non-system eggs will have all
they need to operate correctly?
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> Python developers would *love* to have Debian manage their
Phillip> packages, they would simply like to be able to verify at
Phillip> runtime that the management has in fact been done. It's not
Phillip> that we don't trust
At 09:30 AM 11/25/2005 +1100, David Arnold wrote:
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> Python developers would *love* to have Debian manage their
Phillip> packages, they would simply like to be able to verify at
Phillip> runtime that the management has in fact
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> Python developers would *love* to have Debian manage their
Phillip> packages, they would simply like to be able to verify at
Phillip> runtime that the management has in fact been done. It's not
Phillip> that we don't trust
At 12:39 PM 11/24/2005 -0800, Robert Kern wrote:
I'm not suggesting that /usr/share/.../ should be the only place to find
.egg-info directories. Simply that pkg_resources would scan
sys.path+['/usr/share/.../'] and treat the ones found in /usr/share/.../
as if they were in /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/sit
At 07:54 AM 11/25/2005 +1100, David Arnold wrote:
From a Python-centric viewpoint, Debian's (and RedHat, Gentoo, Solaris,
etc) packaging mechanism, however great, covers only one of the many
possible platforms that an application might need to support.
From a Debian-centric viewpoint, dependency
At 09:10 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
A sane way, first of all, means a consistent way. Having two sorts of
Debian python packages is a no-go. Therefore, if we want to switch to a
new way of distributing packages, there has to be some serious grounds
for it. Currently, the picture
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> I've only been getting the barest hint of what "crappy
Phillip> packaging" consists of, except for the loud-and-clear message
Phillip> that it's defined as Anything But Debian. Since I'm
Phillip> providing for users beyond
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> Note, by the way, that those two things are the only essentials here, as
> best I can tell, and I've already stated my willingness to change *how*
> those two things get accomplished. For clarity, I will repeat yet again,
> in yet another way:
>
> 1. Egg-based projects
At 11:36 AM 11/24/2005 -0800, Robert Kern wrote:
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> Note, by the way, that those two things are the only essentials here, as
> best I can tell, and I've already stated my willingness to change *how*
> those two things get accomplished. For clarity, I will repeat yet again,
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 14:13 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> On the contrary, quite useful technical discussion about how to make this
> work has taken place, including proposed changes *which I have accepted*
> and will implement. You just haven't been participating in any of that
> dis
Am 24.11.2005 um 19:27 schrieb Josselin Mouette:
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 12:49 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
I don't really care if you accept the proposals or not; you guys
need to do
whatever you think is best for Debian. I've only tried to educate
you
about your options regarding eg
At 07:27 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Looks like I mistakenly hoped it was possible to change things on
technical grounds, but if you're rebutting any technical discussion as
"irrelevant", there's probably not much to do.
On the contrary, quite useful technical discussion about
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 13:05 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> You seem to be confusing "users" with "Debian packagers" and "Debian
> users", which are a subset of "users" where these projects are
> concerned. TurboGears targets Mac and Windows as well as Linux, and I've
> seen people on t
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 12:49 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> I don't really care if you accept the proposals or not; you guys need to do
> whatever you think is best for Debian. I've only tried to educate you
> about your options regarding eggs, framed within the assumption that you
> *w
At 06:13 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 11:43 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> That's an interesting perspective, but it's viewing the world through
> vendor-colored glasses. Unless the project developer is wearing similar
> glasses (i.e., has decided t
At 06:03 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 11:46 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> And finally, and most importantly, you're ignoring the fact that this
> discussion began because a Debian developer wanted to package a successful
> egg-using project and its
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 11:43 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> That's an interesting perspective, but it's viewing the world through
> vendor-colored glasses. Unless the project developer is wearing similar
> glasses (i.e., has decided to commit to Debian as their sole platform),
> though,
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 11:46 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> No, what's happening is that you're not paying attention, because you
> believe that Debian already solves those problems, even though it doesn't
> solve them for Python developers who want their projects to be usable on
> every
At 04:20 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 10:14 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> At 01:44 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >They only introduce more complexity, instead of bringing real features.
>
> Please read the hundreds of kilobytes of m
At 03:49 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Hi,
Christopher Lenz:
> (And no, I'm not going to repeat the numerous attempts by Phillip to
> politely and comprehensively explain it all.)
>
Sorry -- I don't buy that. I've read all these messages too, and I also
don't know what's in the me
Alright, now to the lots of (unclear) documentation you pointed me to.
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 10:14 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools#dynamic-discovery-of-services-and-plugins
>
> http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools#defining-a
At 01:44 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
They only introduce more complexity, instead of bringing real features.
Please read the hundreds of kilobytes of messages I've already posted on
this thread, and then when you're done, read these much shorter bits of
documentation for some
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 10:14 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> At 01:44 PM 11/24/2005 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >They only introduce more complexity, instead of bringing real features.
>
> Please read the hundreds of kilobytes of messages I've already posted on
> this thread
I've rea
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 15:19 +0100, Christopher Lenz a écrit :
> > You are advertising this metadata a lot, but what does it exactly
> > contain? If it's for dependencies, we can really live better without
> > them, or with a tool to convert them into .deb dependencies.
>
> You know, it is re
On 11/23/05, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, I think the better long-term approach is more likely to be tools
> like easy_deb that wrap easy_install. "Better" here meaning that it can
> save the system packager work, because it can handle finding and fetching
> and building i
Hi,
Christopher Lenz:
> (And no, I'm not going to repeat the numerous attempts by Phillip to
> politely and comprehensively explain it all.)
>
Sorry -- I don't buy that. I've read all these messages too, and I also
don't know what's in the metadata besides dependency information.
Debian, rpm,
Am 24.11.2005 um 14:26 schrieb Josselin Mouette:
Le mardi 22 novembre 2005 à 11:46 -0600, Ian Bicking a écrit :
Eggs give room for package metadata that doesn't exist otherwise.
Putting dependencies aside, this is functionality that simply doesn't
exist with the standard distutils installation.
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 14:14 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
[...]
> > or having multiple versions of a package
> > installed at the same time.
>
> Is this a joke? Installing several versions of a package is fragile,
> it's a security mistake, and takes place on the hard disk for no real
> use.
Th
Le mardi 22 novembre 2005 à 11:46 -0600, Ian Bicking a écrit :
> Eggs give room for package metadata that doesn't exist otherwise.
> Putting dependencies aside, this is functionality that simply doesn't
> exist with the standard distutils installation.
You are advertising this metadata a lot, bu
Le mardi 22 novembre 2005 à 15:41 -0600, Bob Tanner a écrit :
> When I read the above, my knee-jerk reaction is: Where is the data to backup
> this statement?
>
> Follow up questions are:
>
> How much slower? We talking milliseconds, seconds, minutes? Yes, there are
> variables, here, but narro
Le mardi 22 novembre 2005 à 18:47 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> I don't understand you here. Are you saying that it's not possible for
> dpkg to do a post-install or uninstall operation like adding or removing a
> line from a file?
It's possible, but it's fragile.
> Of course, this creates
Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 18:06 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> The degree of negativity from the Debian side at the outset of this
> conversation (virtually all of it from you) has not been conducive to
> making this happen. As a simple matter of practicality, I can't afford to
> leave
Le mardi 22 novembre 2005 à 17:05 -0500, Phillip J. Eby a écrit :
> And over the last few months, I believe we've also succeeded in stomping
> most of the issues that people had with getting solid non-root
> installations on their Linux distributions. So the reasons for developers
> to prefer t
34 matches
Mail list logo
