On Saturday, 2010-01-09, at 11:47 , Brad Allen wrote:
Now I understand that your 'project' concept probably corresponds
to an entry in PyPI which is associated with multiple releases
Yep. Or actually the project is the thing that a few hackers like
to spend their time on. It is the thing
--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com
On 13 Jan 2010, at 01:14, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn zo...@zooko.com wrote:
When you have a release ready, what do you do with it? You
'package' it, of course. You don't 'project' it, and you don't
'parcel' it. What is the result of the 'packaging'
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn zo...@zooko.com wrote:
On Saturday, 2010-01-09, at 11:47 , Brad Allen wrote:
Now I understand that your 'project' concept probably corresponds to an
entry in PyPI which is associated with multiple releases
Yep. Or actually the project is
Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn zo...@zooko.com writes:
On Saturday, 2010-01-09, at 11:47 , Brad Allen wrote:
Maybe it's just wrong to call the __init__.py directories packages',
because they are really just a piece of what is getting packaged.
Bingo! A package is something that you deliver to
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
If you say I need to install this package it may technically be
unclear if you mean the package foo.bar or the distribution
foo.bar-3.6.tgz, but that difference is not in that case
significant. Installing the distribution and installing the package is
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 09:09, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
If you say I need to install this package it may technically be
unclear if you mean the package foo.bar or the distribution
foo.bar-3.6.tgz, but that difference is not in that
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:33, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
I said that it's not a big problem because in most cases the
terminology mixup does not result in any practical confusion. And I
stand by that.
So we're back to a tautology:
On Jan 10, 2010, at 7:57 PM, David Lyon wrote:
As a regular developer, I'd call for a L'Oeuf incredible. Excuse my bad
french. A new egg to replace all the bad old eggs.
We need more simplicity in packaging in python..
eggs are cool. They're simple. They're what users want. They're what
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:33, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
I said that it's not a big problem because in most cases the
terminology mixup does not result in any
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 15:27, John Gabriele jmg3...@gmail.com wrote:
Lennart, like you said, there's not much confusion for the majority of
cases where the distribution-package (distribution) contains only one
module-package.
Correct, there is not a problem in the majority of the cases, and
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Jan 10, 2010, at 7:57 PM, David Lyon wrote:
As a regular developer, I'd call for a L'Oeuf incredible. Excuse my bad
french. A new egg to replace all the bad old eggs.
We need more simplicity in packaging in python..
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:17 AM, John Gabriele jmg3...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mean, change the general name of these packaged up things from
distributions to eggs? So, we'd generically refer to, say,
CheesyComestible-1.2.3.tgz as an egg?
Interesting.
What term would you use to refer
On Thursday, 2010-01-07, at 20:43 , John Gabriele wrote:
So, here's a suggestion: just call both things (packages and
distributions) packages, but then agree to fully qualify the
names when you need to avoid ambiguity, for example: I just built
a distribution-package (or dist-package for
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
Do you mean, change the general name of these packaged up things from
distributions to eggs?
What I mean is that the egg concept abstracts all the packaging
details from the user extremely well.
If a user gets told that
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 10:01, Glyph Lefkowitz gl...@twistedmatrix.com
wrote:
This is precisely what I meant to recommend: Parcel would be a
good replacement word for the Python-specific meaning of
distribution. I'm sorry if I was ambiguous and
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 4:54 AM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 10:01, Glyph Lefkowitz gl...@twistedmatrix.com
wrote:
This is precisely what I meant to recommend: Parcel would be a good
replacement word for the Python-specific meaning of distribution. I'm
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 5:53 AM, Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 10:01, Glyph Lefkowitz gl...@twistedmatrix.com
wrote:
This is
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
At this point, people are just going to keep calling this entity a
“package”, consistent with the majority of other languages and systems
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 16:24, Brad Allen bradallen...@gmail.com wrote:
I had thought 'egg' was just another distribution format, an
alternative to tarball, etc. But I have heard people at my local user
group use it to mean 'module distribution'.
Yeah, there is some confusion there. As I
At 05:32 PM 1/10/2010 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 16:24, Brad Allen bradallen...@gmail.com wrote:
I had thought 'egg' was just another distribution format, an
alternative to tarball, etc. But I have heard people at my local user
group use it to mean 'module
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Brad Allen bradallen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 5:53 AM, Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010
On 10/01/2010 18:46, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Brad Allenbradallen...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, it's a big change but common usage is a strong tailwind which
could make it easier. It could start with a PEP and a survey link sent
to python-announce. Personally I
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Rafael Villar Burke (Pachi)
pa...@rvburke.com wrote:
That's why I think 1) is easier and find very compelling John Gabrielle's
idea of qualifying the terms package as module package and (module)
distribution as distribution package. These point to the two
Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 12:40, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
At this point, people are just going to keep calling this entity a
“package”, consistent with the majority of other languages and
systems out there.
I'm not sure that's a
Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
At this point, people are just going to keep calling this entity a
“package”, consistent with the majority of other languages and
systems out there.
Who is people.
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 18:38, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
(Also, since Python 2.5+ distutils generate .egg-info files, all
distutils-installed module distributions from Python 2.5 on are technically
eggs.)
Aha... Stuck in Plone-land, I'm still mostly on 2.4. :-)
That means that
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 22:02, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
You might be saying something tautologically true: When the terms
“package” and “distribution” are used to refer to the same thing, their
referents are identical. Well yes, of course.
No, what I'm saying is that each
Hi Glyph,
It sure would be nice if we could use a made-up word like eggs to refer
to these things. Too bad that's taken too :-\.
Yes.
eggs is the best name anybody could hope for to describe a package. It
already has general acceptance to a large degree amongst users (despite
it's faults).
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Yes, very much. I like 'parcel' better than 'project', partly because
it's not already overload with other contextual meanings.
This is just another example of the degree of confusion around terminology
here, because
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Fred Drake fdr...@gmail.com wrote:
The point of carefully defined terminology is primarily to make sure
that relatively formal communication, such as technical documentation,
can be carried out both effectively and efficiently. There's no need
to dictate
At 09:13 AM 1/9/2010 -0600, Brad Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Yes, very much. I like 'parcel' better than 'project', partly because
it's not already overload with other contextual meanings.
This is just another example of the degree
[skipping a lot of lines ...]
Brad Does anyone who vote +1 for 'project' want to change that vote to
Brad 'parcel'?
I do
http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/fixing-packaging-terminology-confusion
- However, as P.J. Eby pointed out correctly, *parcel* would be a
substitute for
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 10:38 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 09:13 AM 1/9/2010 -0600, Brad Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Yes, very much. I like 'parcel' better than 'project', partly because
it's not already overload
Oops, I hit send too soon. Please ignore my prior message which
contain scratch text at the end. The corrected message follows:
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 10:38 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 09:13 AM 1/9/2010 -0600, Brad Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM, P.J. Eby
On Jan 08, 2010, at 04:58 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I read this as a -1 for changing PyPI to use project.
Still, support *for* renaming it is much wider, it seems.
I wish there was a humorous, ironic name for the service that is evocative of
the Python language's original conceit. Something
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Glyph Lefkowitz gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On Jan 7, 2010, at 10:43 PM, John Gabriele wrote:
3. People don't like calling those MyProject-1.0.2.tgz thingies
distributions. They keep calling them packages, and when you correct
them, they say, [sigh], fine.
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I wish there was a humorous, ironic name for the service that is evocative of
the Python language's original conceit. Something that at first glance says
we should have lots of tasty morsels to offer here, then oh, sorry, the
cat's eaten them. The irony of course being that
Just my 2 cents:
- The definitions that Tarek proposed it exactly how I already use the words.
- I think Python Project Index is a better name than Python Package
Index. But Cheese Shop is still better. :)
That's all I have to say about it. :-)
--
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
Just my 2 cents:
- The definitions that Tarek proposed it exactly how I already use the words.
- I think Python Project Index is a better name than Python Package
Index. But Cheese Shop is still better. :)
That's all
At 11:00 AM 1/8/2010 -0600, Brad Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
Just my 2 cents:
- The definitions that Tarek proposed it exactly how I already
use the words.
- I think Python Project Index is a better name than Python Package
Index.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lennart Regebro wrote:
Just my 2 cents:
- The definitions that Tarek proposed it exactly how I already use the words.
- I think Python Project Index is a better name than Python Package
Index. But Cheese Shop is still better. :)
That's all I
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 10:35:39AM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Jan 08, 2010, at 04:58 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I read this as a -1 for changing PyPI to use project.
Still, support *for* renaming it is much wider, it seems.
I wish there was a humorous, ironic name for the service that
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Brad Allen bradallen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:40 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
As for projects: fine with me; PyPI would then be the Python Project
Index.
+1
If this gets general agreement, there are
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 3:51 PM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
I don't think we need to change anything - most Python software
components come as Python packages nowadays, so the terminology
'package' we've used all these years is correct.
Do you mean only 'package' in the sense of an
Brad Allen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 3:51 PM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
I don't think we need to change anything - most Python software
components come as Python packages nowadays, so the terminology
'package' we've used all these years is correct.
Do you mean only
45 matches
Mail list logo
