Stanley A. Klein wrote:
> Windows and Mac are fundamentally single user systems that have added
> capabilities for multiple users and are intended to be used with
> proprietary software. Those considerations lead to minimal dependencies
> among packages (each proprietary provider needs to contro
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008, Greg Ewing wrote:
> John J Lee wrote:
>> If you have a network connection, about the only reason for not wanting an
>> app to be "installed" is that it has changed the behaviour of your system
>> somehow, just by being in the "installed" state.
>
> If you have a continuous hi
David Cournapeau wrote:
> There are two ways of looking at it, I think. One is to think that linux
> FHS (and unix in general) is totally broken.
I don't think it's *totally* broken. I do think it goes
overboard with splitting things up and scattering them
around. I understand that there are reas
John J Lee wrote:
> If you have a network connection, about the only reason for not wanting
> an app to be "installed" is that it has changed the behaviour of your
> system somehow, just by being in the "installed" state.
If you have a continuous high-speed network connection and
aren't concerne
Greg Ewing wrote:
>
> That looks interesting, but I'm not sure I'd quite
> call it "something like". It looks like another case
> of adding more complexity to fight existing complexity,
> rather than removing the original complexity.
>
You won't be able to remove the initial complexity, because it
Gael Varoquaux wrote:
>
> 90 % (at least) of the world does not have such database. I, and probably
> you, have such a very nice database. I works well, and we can choose to
> forget the problems our users are facing. It does not solve them though.
>
> In addition, packaging is system-specific. I r
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, Greg Ewing wrote:
> John J Lee wrote:
>
>> It allows you to think about "uninstallation" as "delete the app == delete
>> the file"
>
> But 0install doesn't do that, as far as I can tell -- it
> still keeps the data in some mysterious form and location
> known only to itself,
John J Lee wrote:
> It allows you to think about "uninstallation" as "delete the app ==
> delete the file"
But 0install doesn't do that, as far as I can tell -- it
still keeps the data in some mysterious form and location
known only to itself, and requires you to use special tools
to install/rem
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008, Greg Ewing wrote:
> John J Lee wrote:
>>> I keep hoping that someday Linux will support something
>>> like MacOSX application bundles and frameworks,
>>
>> Not the same, but "something like":
>>
>> http://0install.net/
>
> That looks interesting, but I'm not sure I'd quite
> c
John J Lee wrote:
>> I keep hoping that someday Linux will support something
>> like MacOSX application bundles and frameworks,
>
> Not the same, but "something like":
>
> http://0install.net/
That looks interesting, but I'm not sure I'd quite
call it "something like". It looks like another case
On Fri, April 11, 2008 6:00 am, Dave Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:16:03 -0500
> From: Dave Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Distutils] how to easily consume just the parts of eggs
> that are good
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 03:48 PM 4/10/2008 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:
>> Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 18:17 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:
I think I can sum up any further points by simply asking: "Should it
be safe to assume I can distribute my application via eggs
At 03:48 PM 4/10/2008 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:
>Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>>On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 18:17 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:
>>>I think I can sum up any further points by simply asking: "Should it
>>>be safe to assume I can distribute my application via eggs /
>>>easy_install just because i
Stanley A. Klein wrote:
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 18:17 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:
I think I can sum up any further points by simply asking: "Should it
be safe to assume I can distribute my application via eggs /
easy_install just because it is written in Python?"
I think that based on
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Paul Moore wrote:
[...]
> I keep hoping that someday Linux will support something
> like MacOSX application bundles and frameworks, but I
> haven't seen any sign of it yet.
Not the same, but "something like":
http://0install.net/
John
_
At 11:36 AM 4/10/2008 -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>The reason I say that the natural use case for Python is closest to
>Linux/Unix is that Python is FOSS and its natural approaches encourage
>dependencies that are not hidden from the user. It is natural in
>Unix/Linux to install dependencies th
On Thu, April 10, 2008 10:47 am, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 10/04/2008, Stanley A. Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In summary, Python is being used on systems that have very different
>> underlying OS use cases. To some extent, the natural use case for
>> Python
>> is closest to that of Linux/Uni
On 10/04/2008, Stanley A. Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In summary, Python is being used on systems that have very different
> underlying OS use cases. To some extent, the natural use case for Python
> is closest to that of Linux/Unix. Running Python on Windows/Mac requires
> adapting for th
On Wed, April 9, 2008 10:05 pm, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:59:39 +1200
> From: Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Distutils] how to easily consume just the parts of eggs
> that are good for you
>
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 02:26:31PM -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
> The rpm and deb package managers (and their yum and other higher level
> dependency managers) do a lot of things:
> 1. They install packages and maintain databases of what packages were
> installed
> 2. They manage dependencies
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 18:17 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:
> I think I can sum up any further points by simply asking: "Should it
> be safe to assume I can distribute my application via eggs /
> easy_install just because it is written in Python?"
I think that based on this discussion the bottom li
Paul Moore wrote:
> I believe that Mac OS X goes for an even simpler structure -
> applications store *everything* in the one directory, so that
> install/uninstall is simply a directory copy/remove.
Yep, and thereby cuts the whole gordian knot, throws the
pieces on the fire and burns them. :-)
At 12:51 AM 4/10/2008 +0200, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 11:46:19PM +0100, Paul Moore wrote:
> > I find this whole discussion hugely confusing, because a lot of people
> > are stating opinions about environments which it seems they don't use,
> > or know much about. I don't know
Paul Moore wrote:
On 09/04/2008, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Stanley A. Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A reasonable way to deal with Windows would be to create a package
> manager for it that could be used by Python and anyone else who
wanted to use it. [...] This is
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
Applying LSB and FHS to the innards of Python packages makes as much
sense as applying them to the contents of Java .jar files -- i.e.,
none. If it's unchanging data that's part of a program or library,
then it's a program or library, just like static data declared in a C
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 11:52:08PM +0100, Paul Moore wrote:
> And I would say that Windows doesn't have a problem. Are any Windows
> users proposing building a package management system for Windows
> (Python-specific or otherwise)? It's a genuine question - is this
> something that Windows users ar
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 11:46:19PM +0100, Paul Moore wrote:
> I find this whole discussion hugely confusing, because a lot of people
> are stating opinions about environments which it seems they don't use,
> or know much about. I don't know how to avoid this, but it does make
> it highly unlikely t
On 09/04/2008, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Stanley A. Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > A reasonable way to deal with Windows would be to create a package
> > manager for it that could be used by Python and anyone else who
> > wanted to use it. [...] This is primarily a Windows
"Stanley A. Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IMHO, the main system without a package manager is Windows.
AFAICT the MacOS platform also lacks in this area.
> A reasonable way to deal with Windows would be to create a package
> manager for it that could be used by Python and anyone else who
>
On 09/04/2008, Stanley A. Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think you raise an interesting issue: What is a package manager?
My (very simplistic) answer is that it's whatever someone uses to
manage packages. What level of functionality it has is irrelevant, as
long as it suits an individual's
On Apr 9, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>
>> You are talking here about bdist_rpm and not about a tool that
>> would take
>> a Python package distributed as an egg file and convert the egg to
>> an rpm
>> or a deb. Unfortunately, some Python packagers are beginning to
>> limit
>>
On Apr 9, 2008, at 6:00 AM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>
>> By the way, if these tools work well, they are priceless!
>
> I haven't had need to use any of them, so I don't really know.
They are easydeb [1] and stddeb [2]. The former appears to be
incomplete and unmaintained. The latter appears to
At 04:43 PM 4/9/2008 -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>I don't understand what you mean by "shared environments and development
> environments".
I mean that in a shared or development environment, a system packager
isn't useful, since it expects things to live in *one* place, and
usually to have
On Wed, April 9, 2008 4:27 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 21:21:09 +0100
> From: Floris Bruynooghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Distutils] how to easily consume just the parts of eggs
> thatare good for you
> To: distutil
On Wed, April 9, 2008 3:40 pm, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 11:52 AM 4/9/2008 -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>>However, are you implying that the installation information for Python
>> egg
>>packages accesses and coordinates with the rpm database?
>
> Yes, when the information isn't stripped out. Tr
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 02:26:31PM -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
> I don't know what Windows add/remove
> programs function does, but all it might do is to run the executable to
> install packages and record the installation (as was previously done by
> third party programs) to facilitate clean re
On Wed, April 9, 2008 3:19 pm, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 02:26:31PM -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>> The rpm and deb package managers (and their yum and other higher level
>> dependency managers) do a lot of things:
>
>> 1. They install packages and maintain databases of wh
At 11:52 AM 4/9/2008 -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>However, are you implying that the installation information for Python egg
>packages accesses and coordinates with the rpm database?
Yes, when the information isn't stripped out. Try a more recent Fedora.
>IMHO, the main system without a pack
All my development is done on Linux. I use Windows very minimally (such
as for tax preparation) and unless forced to do so for specific
circumstances (such as submittal to grants.gov) do not expose Windows to
the Internet.
In the future there may possibly arise a need for us to port some
Linux-de
On 09/04/2008, Stanley A. Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMHO, the main system without a package manager is Windows. A reasonable
> way to deal with Windows would be to create a package manager for it that
> could be used by Python and anyone else who wanted to use it. The package
> manage
L PROTECTED]>
>> > Subject: Re: [Distutils] how to easily consume just the parts of eggs
>> > thatare good for you
>> > To: Distutils-Sig@Python.Org
>> >
>> >
>> > zooko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> eyes
At 10:00 AM 4/9/2008 +0200, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 12:41:32AM -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > >The way to achieve a database for Python would be to provide tools for
> > >conversion of eggs to rpms and debs,
>
> > Such tools already exist, although the conversion takes plac
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 12:41:32AM -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> >The way to achieve a database for Python would be to provide tools for
> >conversion of eggs to rpms and debs,
> Such tools already exist, although the conversion takes place from
> source distributions rather than egg distributio
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 11:37:07AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> zooko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I am skeptical that prorgammers are going to be willing to use a new
> > database format. They already have a database -- their filesystem --
> > and they already have the tools to control it -- mv,
At 10:49 PM 4/8/2008 -0400, Stanley A. Klein wrote:
>On Tue, April 8, 2008 9:37 pm, Ben Finney
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:37:07 +1000
> > From: Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: [Distutils] how to easily consume j
On Tue, April 8, 2008 9:37 pm, Ben Finney
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:37:07 +1000
> From: Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Distutils] how to easily consume just the parts of eggs
> that are good for you
> T
zooko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am skeptical that prorgammers are going to be willing to use a new
> database format. They already have a database -- their filesystem --
> and they already have the tools to control it -- mv, rm, and
> PYTHONPATH. Many of them already hate the existence the
>
Folks:
Here is a simple proposal: make the standard Python "import"
mechanism notice eggs on the PYTHONPATH and insert them (into the
*same* location) on the sys.path.
This eliminates the #1 problem with eggs -- that they don't easily
work when installing them into places other than your s
48 matches
Mail list logo
