On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote:
I've tried to digest PEP426 and collected my thoughts below. Apologies
if you read through them and they offer you nothing useful.
I'm trying to imagine the future we're driving towards here where
OpenStack is no longer
Just a short note to state the obvious - the specific pycparsing
library from the example did exactly what it should have done and can
do in the current system, by incrementing its major version number for
a backwards-incompatible release.
Dependency management is a job though.
On Mar 04, 2013, at 06:11 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
My point of view is that the system Python is there primarily to run
system utilities and user scripts, rather than arbitrary Python
applications. Users can install alternate versions of software into
their user site directories, or into virtual
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Mar 04, 2013, at 06:11 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
My point of view is that the system Python is there primarily to run
system utilities and user scripts, rather than arbitrary Python
applications. Users can install alternate
In article
cag8k2+74cuh6p_mmgvs2hlknreim_iepbq0u7vf9dtpxk4+...@mail.gmail.com,
Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
Apple does (or did) something very useful by not including the stdlib
source code in OS X's builtin Python, making the system Python so
hilariously useless for development that
Hi Nick,
Thanks for the detailed reply. I'll stick to PEP426 related topics in
this mail.
Generally speaking, PEP426 looks like good progress, but the biggest
problem I see now is the lack of parallel installs for incompatible
versions.
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 18:11 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Ned Deily n...@acm.org wrote:
In article
cag8k2+74cuh6p_mmgvs2hlknreim_iepbq0u7vf9dtpxk4+...@mail.gmail.com,
Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
Apple does (or did) something very useful by not including the stdlib
source code in OS X's builtin Python,
Hey,
On parallel installs ...
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 18:11 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote:
- Incompatible versions of the same library are routinely installed
in parallel. Does PEP426 here, or is all the work to be
On Monday, March 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hey,
On parallel installs ...
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 18:11 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com
(mailto:mar...@redhat.com) wrote:
- Incompatible versions of the same
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Nick,
Thanks for the detailed reply. I'll stick to PEP426 related topics in
this mail.
Generally speaking, PEP426 looks like good progress, but the biggest
problem I see now is the lack of parallel installs for
In thinking about how virtualenv would describe the packages it wants
to preload in PEP 426 metadata form, it occurred to me that there are
scenarios with setuptools and distribute where it's not obvious how to
state the requirement you want. Specifically, if you want to install
setuptools if it
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
In thinking about how virtualenv would describe the packages it wants
to preload in PEP 426 metadata form, it occurred to me that there are
scenarios with setuptools and distribute where it's not obvious how to
state the
On 4 March 2013 20:00, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
In thinking about how virtualenv would describe the packages it wants
to preload in PEP 426 metadata form, it occurred to me that there are
scenarios with
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
In thinking about how virtualenv would describe the packages it wants
to preload in PEP 426 metadata form, it occurred to me that there are
scenarios with setuptools and distribute where it's not obvious how to
state the
This is peripherally related to PEP 426, to the extent that PEP 426
specifies that the distribution metadata goes in the dist-info
directory defined by PEP 376. The dist-info directory conceptually
replaces the old de-facto standard egg-info directory. But neither PEP
376 nor PEP 426 mention
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
This is peripherally related to PEP 426, to the extent that PEP 426
specifies that the distribution metadata goes in the dist-info
directory defined by PEP 376. The dist-info directory conceptually
replaces the old de-facto
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 12:44 -0500, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Monday, March 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
If parallel incompatible installs is a hopeless problem in Python,
why
the push to semantic versioning then rather than saying that
incompatible API changes should mean a
On Mar 04, 2013, at 10:29 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
The approach that some Fedora folks are trying out is called Software
Collections. It's not Python specific, but it's basically the same as a
virtual environment.
It's a serious problem, and I think it will be made more so by the incursions
Paul Moore p.f.moore at gmail.com writes:
There are two questions here that bear discussion. First of all, when
creating a wheel, should builders put custom metadata files from the
existing egg-info data into the dist-info directory. I would suggest
that yes, they should, as otherwise that
On 4 March 2013 23:17, Vinay Sajip vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I agree with Daniel here - I don't see any point in writing to .egg-info, and
if
people can't use distribute, they'll have to wait for setuptools to get
compatibility. Presumably, the only reason for not using distribute would
On Monday, March 4, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 12:44 -0500, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Monday, March 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
If parallel incompatible installs is a hopeless problem in Python,
why
the push to semantic versioning
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 12:44 -0500, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Monday, March 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
If parallel incompatible installs is a hopeless problem in Python,
why
the push to semantic
22 matches
Mail list logo
