On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 12:47, 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.
Linux distributions, which are much, much more popular than any collection of packages on PyPI you might care to name. Isolated environments have their uses, but they are the exception, not the rule. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
