On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 1:47 PM, René Dudfield <ren...@gmail.com> 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.
packages on pypi has no implication whether I have only one version of it or several in different isolated environment. Actually, I have only 1 version for almost all packages that I use, and those are on the python path, (and many of them are easy_installed from pypi, or exe installed). The only ones I have in several versions are the ones I work on myself, or where I track a repository. Josef > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
