René Dudfield wrote: > On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Ravi <lists_r...@lavabit.com> wrote: >> On Wednesday 30 December 2009 06:15:45 René Dudfield wrote: >> >>> I agree with many things in that post. Except your conclusion on >>> multiple versions of packages in isolation. Package isolation is like >>> processes, and package sharing is like threads - and threads are evil! >> You have stated this several times, but is there any evidence that this is >> the >> desire of the majority of users? In the scientific community, interactive >> experimentation is critical and users are typically not seasoned systems >> administrators. For such users, almost all packages installed after >> installing >> python itself are packages they use. In particular, all I want to do is to >> use >> apt/yum to get the packages (or ask my sysadmin, who rightfully has no >> interest in learning the intricacies of python package installation, to do >> so) >> and continue with my work. "Packages-in-isolation" is for people whose job is >> to run server farms, not interactive experimenters. >> > > 500+ packages on pypi. Provide a counter point, otherwise the > evidence is against your position - overwhelmingly.
?!? Wouldn't you need to measure the number of downloads (and also figure out something else to measure that relative to)? Uploading something to PyPI is easy enough to do and probably done by default by a lot of package authors -- that doesn't mean that it is the main distribution method. -- Dag Sverre _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
