On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote:
> Given that we're starting now ( not a year or two ago) and it'll take
> a while for it to really catch on, we should go CentOS 6 ( or
> equivalent ) now?
>
> CentOS5 was released in 2007! That is a
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
[...]
>> ...well, or maybe just erroring out when it sees the future and asking
>> the user to help would be good enough :-). This would impose the
>> requirement going forward that we'd have to wait for a pip release
>>
I agree that this is an important detail. I generally use machines that
have many different Python interpreters installed (some distro-provided and
others in my home directory), and can easily imagine wanting them to have
different behavior w.r.t. manylinux1 wheels.
Perhaps the option could be
Alternatively, perhaps this question could be delegated to the pip
maintainers, for pip to store and maintain this configuration option
itself, perhaps by using its cache (for example, Linux pip already stores
some caches in ~/.cache/pip)?
-Robert
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Robert T.
(e.g. by bumping up
>> the base ABI from CentOS 5 to CentOS 6).
>
> The problem with this is that python 2.7 is going to be supported and
> widely used until well past the EOL of CentOS 5, and maybe even past
> the EOL of CentOS 6
Given that we're starting now ( not a year or two ago) and it'll
Hi all,
I think the PEP is pretty close to ready, but there's one remaining
minor-but-substantive technical point that got mostly skipped in the
previous discussion, and that I'm a little concerned about and wanted
to highlight. This is the mechanism by which a distribution/user can
explicitly
Hi,
This PEP is an updated version of the draft manylinux1 PEP posted to this
list a couple days
ago by Nathaniel and myself. The changes reflect the discussion on the list
(thanks to everyone
for all of the feedback), and generally go to the clarity and precision of
the text.
HTML version: