On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. >
wrong. pypi has way more python packages than any linux distribution. 8500+ listed, compared to how many in debian? _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
